District of Columbia v. Donaldson

D.C. Circuit

District of Columbia v. Donaldson

38 App. D.C. 259, 1912 U.S. App. LEXIS 2117

CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

DecidedFebruary 5, 1912

DocketNo. 2334

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 38 App. D.C. 259 (District of Columbia v. Donaldson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

District of Columbia v. Donaldson, 38 App. D.C. 259, 1912 U.S. App. LEXIS 2117 (D.C. Cir. 1912).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Justice Van Orsdel

delivered the opinion of the Court:

Appellee, Laura V. Donaldson, plaintiff below, secured a judgment against the District of Columbia for damages for personal injuries resulting from a fall. In her declaration she specifically charged that the accident occurred on a sidewalk where defendant had negligently left a “precipitous descent, or incline, unpaved, ungraded, and unguarded, and dangerous to persons passing” thereon. The evidence disclosed that the accident did not occur on the sidewalk, but on a path leading from the sidewalk across the parking, and temporarily used by the public during a period of snow and ice, to avoid passing over the place described in the declaration. The variance between the allegations and the proof is fatal. The motion of defendant for an instructed verdict in its favor should have been granted. The judgment is reversed with costs, and it is so ordered.

Reversed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Mr. Justice Van Orsdel

delivered the opinion of the Court:

Appellee, Laura V. Donaldson, plaintiff below, secured a judgment against the District of Columbia for damages for personal injuries resulting from a fall. In her declaration she specifically charged that the accident occurred on a sidewalk where defendant had negligently left a “precipitous descent, or incline, unpaved, ungraded, and unguarded, and dangerous to persons passing” thereon. The evidence disclosed that the accident did not occur on the sidewalk, but on a path leading from the sidewalk across the parking, and temporarily used by the public during a period of snow and ice, to avoid passing over the place described in the declaration. The variance between the allegations and the proof is fatal. The motion of defendant for an instructed verdict in its favor should have been granted. The judgment is reversed with costs, and it is so ordered.

Reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

38 App. D.C. 259, 1912 U.S. App. LEXIS 2117, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/district-of-columbia-v-donaldson-cadc-1912.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack