Watson v. City of Alameda
Before: Langdon
LANGDON, J.
This is an action for damages for personal injuries. Employees of defendant City of Alameda, acting under orders of the chief of police, were engaged in marking pedestrian crossing lanes at the intersection of Park Street and Santa Clara Avenue, in the business district of said city. Eight-inch lines were painted in bright orange, establishing lanes nine feet wide. Having finished one side, the workmen proceeded to the other, leaving the wet, painted lanes without barricade or warning sign. Plaintiff, while crossing the street, stepped on the wet paint, slipped and fell, sustaining serious injuries. The jury brought in a verdict in her favor for $9,000, and defendant city appeals from the resulting judgment.
Liability on the part of the city is sought to be imposed under the act of 1923 (Stats. 1923, p. 675; Leering’s Gen. Laws, 1931, Act 5619). As far as is relevant here, this statute makes the city liable for injuries to person or property resulting from the
dangerous or defective condition
of public streets, where the “board, officer or person having authority to remedy such condition, had
knowledge or notice”
thereof, and “failed or neglected, for a reasonable time after acquiring such knowledge or receiving such notice”, to remedy such condition or to take steps reasonably necessary to protect the public.
We accept as conclusive the verdict of the jury on the negligence of the street workers, and the absence of contributory negligence on the part of plaintiff. The question is whether plaintiff has proved a case within the terms of the statute.
Since the accident happened shortly after the work was done, there was, of course, no opportunity for the chief of police, superintendent of streets, or any other responsible officer of defendant to obtain knowledge or notice of any dangerous condition; and, indeed, the condition itself could last but a few hours, during which the paint would dry. Nor does the record contain any suggestion that the absence of warning signs or barricades was actually made known to any of these officers. This ease is therefore distinguishable
[333]
More from California Supreme Court
- People v. Wende (1979)
- People v. Watson (1956)
- People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996)
- People v. Kelly (2006)
- Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court (1962)
- Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001)
- People v. Lewis (2021)
- In Re Estrada (1965)
- Denham v. Superior Court (1970)
- People v. Marsden (1970)