Toledo v. Smith

Citations

• 22 Ohio C.C. Dec. 141

Syllabus

<p>NEGLIGENCE — SIDEWALKS.</p> <p>1. Not Ordinary Care to Walk over a Sidewalk Known to be Defective and Unsafe when it can Easily be Avoided.</p> <p>A person who in the daytime voluntarily attempts to pass over a sidewalk in a oity which he knows from any cause to he dangerously defective and which he might easily have avoided, cannot he regarded as in the exercise of -ordinary care or prudence, and therefore cannot maintain an action against a municipality for damages sustained on account of any such known defect, even if the city was guilty of negligence in allowing such defect to exist.</p> <p>2. Erroneous Charge as to Contributory Negligence.</p> <p>A charge that if an ordinarily prudent man would have attempted to pass over a walk alleged to he dangerously defective, with knowledge of its condition, and if the plaintiff in attempting to do so exercised the care which an ordinarily prudent person would have exercised in the condition which you find this walk was in at that time, he was not guilty of negligence in attempting to use the walk and is entitled to recover, held error.</p> <p>[Syllabus approved hy thq court.] .</p>