Wolpers v. City of Spokane

Citations

• 72 Wash. 562
• 131 P. 230
• 1913 Wash. LEXIS 1514

Syllabus

<p>Master and Servant — Safe Place — Bridge Construction — Negligence — Question for Jury. The negligence of a city in failing to properly support a temporary arch for a bridge is for the jury, where witnesses testified that it “buckled” or “listed,” and leaned upstream six to eighteen inches, that it was an efficient barrier to the wind, and that the wind which caused the fall was not unusual or unprecedented.</p> <p>Same — Assumption of Risks. A workman on a city bridge does not assume the risks of changing conditions requiring engineering oversight and due to outside causes, as a high wind and listing, as distinguished from those incidental to the work itself.</p> <p>New Trial — Grounds—Misconduct of Counsel. In a case against a city, a new trial will not be granted for misconduct of plaintiffs counsel, in that at one time he represented the defendant, where it appears that when he was corporation counsel, his name had been signed to an answer for the defendant, but that he had nothing to do with the case, and was unexpectedly called to represent the plaintiff in the absence of his partner, and the case had been well tried and twice appealed.</p>