City of Austin v. Rangel

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that plaintiff had not created fact issue on City’s constructive knowledge because nothing in record showed how long lid had been missing, there were no reports regarding the missing lid in two years, and no other recent service reports of any kind in area
• noting, in opinion that does not recount time of day or lighting conditions at time of plaintiff’s injury, that “normal user of” sidewalk would “not expect to encounter a hole of this size on a downtown public sidewalk”
• “When determining whether a special defect exists, courts often look to factors such as the size, nature, location and permanence of the condition.”
• under higher standard for special defect, no fact issue of city’s knowledge of special defect where no evidence about “how long the meter’s lid had been missing, or who or what caused it to go missing”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).