Reed v. Borough

Citations

• 213 Pa. 357
• 62 A. 928
• 1906 Pa. LEXIS 483

Syllabus

<p>Negligence — Boroughs—Sidewalk—Standard of care.</p> <p>The duty of a borough to supervise its sidewalks and to maintain them in a reasonably safe condition is measured by the standard of reasonable care, and it cannot be left to the judgment or caprice of a jury to establish any other standard. The necessity for and the plan of municipal improvements are matters within the discretion of the municipal authorities. The question of necessity is never for a jury, and the question as to the plan is not whether the best and safest plan has been adopted, but whether that adopted is reasonably safe. The same rule applies as to the duty of maintenance.</p> <p>In an action against a borough to recover damages for injuries occasioned by the projection of a paving stone above adjoining stones in a sidewalk, it is reversible error for the court to instruct the jury as follows: “If you find that it did project up as stated by the plaintiff — and some of the defendant’s witnesses show pretty much the same state of affairs — of course there is a difference in their testimony; but if you find that it is a negligent thing for the borough to do, and would fix a better standard for the borough, and think that they ought to have maintained a better and safer sidewalk under the circumstances, and that this was a much traveled street, taking into consideration the size of the place and the number of foot passengers there, then the next question is whether that negligence caused the injury.”</p>