New Search
f. J <br /> TO: Ken HIatch, Maintenance Engineer <br /> FROM: John L. Franklin, Assistant City Attorney <br /> SUBJECT: City Liability for Gravel on Sidewalks <br /> May 7, 1975 <br /> circumstances, the knowledge of the city necessary for liability may <br /> be implied. The following quote from an old Oregon case makes these <br /> ---- -{ points clear: <br /> "Notice to a city of an unsafe and dangerous condition <br /> of its streets or sidewalks may be implied if the defect <br /> has existed for such a length of time that the municipal <br /> authorities, by the exercise of reasonable care and <br /> diligence, could have known of its existence and remedied <br /> it. There is no fixed or definite rule as to what length <br /> of time would be required to justify such inference of . <br /> notice on the part of a municipality, but such case must <br /> depend upon the facts and peculiar circumstances attending <br /> it." Cartano vs. City of Athena, 90 Or 586 (1919) <br /> Under the circumstances of this case, I am fairly confident that <br /> the city would be held to have implied notice of gravel upon the <br /> alley aprons around the city. <br /> In summary then, the city will probably be held liable for <br /> injuries sustained because of gravel on alley aprons. Further, it <br /> is highly unlikely that property owners abutting alley aprons can be <br /> held responsible for keeping them clear. <br /> If you have further questions concerning this matter or if there <br /> is anything further that I can do, please give me a call. <br /> John L. Franklin <br /> E ♦ S . <br />