Dutton v. Lansdowne Borough

Citations

• 198 Pa. 563
• 48 A. 494
• 1901 Pa. LEXIS 839

Syllabus

<p>Negligence — Municipalities — Boroughs — Sidewalks — Joint action against borough and landowner.</p> <p>Au action to recover damages for personal injuries caused by a defective sidewalk may be brought either against the municipality or the property owner, but it does not follow that both can be sued jointly, the measure of responsibility being very different. That of the owner is primary and absolute, to know and to do, while that of the borough is secondary and supplemental, to see that the property owner makes and maintains a safe pavement, and its breach of duty is not in failing to do the work, but in failing to compel the owner to do it.</p> <p>Actions— Trespass—Joint tort feasors.</p> <p>If two defendants be sued jointly, for a tort, and the evidence is not sufficient to hold one, there may be a discontinuance as to that one, and the trial may proceed, as to the other.</p> <p>Where a declaration is for a joint tort, and the case goes to the jury as against both defendants, if under such circumstances the evidence fails to show that the defendants were joint tort feasors, it is error to permit a recovery against one or both. Such a case would show, not a mere misjoinder of the parties, but a misjoinder of causes of action.</p> <p>A joint action of trespass cannot be brought against a municipality and a property owner to recover damages for personal injuries caused by a defective sidewalk.</p>