Horner v. City of Atchison

Citations

• 93 Kan. 557
• 144 P. 1010
• 1914 Kan. LEXIS 470

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1. Personal Injuries — Collapse of Bridge — Bridge Outside City Limits — Corporate Organization of City Can Not be Attacked Collaterally. The plaintiff sued the city for damages for personal injuries resulting from the collapse of a bridge. The defense was that the bridge was not in the city. The proof was that upon taking in an addition to the city, not adjacent to the bridge, the bridge had been left outside the city limits by an ordinance changing and defining the boundaries of the city. Held, the plaintiff could not make a collateral attack upon the corporate organization of the city by questioning the validity of the ordinance.</p> <p>2. Same — Contributing to Maintenance of Bridge — City Not Liable on Grounds of Estoppel and Assumed Control. Although the bridge was carried on the county records as bridge number 81 on road number 59, it lay but a few feet, or at most a few yards, beyond the city limits. It was of great convenience to the inhabitants of the city and the city officials on occasions inspected it and contributed to the expense of rebuilding and repairing it. Held, the city was not responsible for the condition of the bridge, on the grounds of estoppel and assumed control.</p>