Mitchel v. City of Richmond

Citations

• 107 Va. 193
• 57 S.E. 570
• 1907 Va. LEXIS 25

Syllabus

<p>1. MuNICIPAL Convonivions-Strcet s-Leaving Sidewalks-Walking in Gutter-Negligcnce.-A pedestrian who leaves a city sidewalk; which is neither obstructed nor in an nnsafe condition, but merely wet, muddy and in a disagreeable condition to walk on, and walks in and along an adjacent paved gutter constructed for drainage duly, and, without exercising ordinary care for his own safety, falls into a sewer inlet made in the gutter for the purpose of drainage, is guilty of such contributory negligence as bars any recov~r,y against the city. The necessity for such inlets is a matter of common knowledge, of which every one mnst take notice, and the dangers of which they must guard against, even where they leave the ssdewalk for sufficient cause.</p> <p>2. APPEAL AND Ennon-Reviewing Rulings on Immaterial Evidence-Correct T'erdict.-Where it appears that there was no sufficient reason for a pedestrian's leaving the sidewalk and walking in an adjacent paved gutter, and the jury have rightly so found under instructions from the court, this court will not undertake to review the rulings of the trial conrt in rejecting eyidence offered by the plaintiff, as to the city's having repaired the place in the gutter where the plaintiff was injured, or that others had fallen into the same or similar openings in the gutter. As there could have been no other • • verdict rightly found than what *as found, the proffered evidence was immaterial.</p>