144 Mich. 684 | Mich. | 1906
This action is brought to recover for injuries received by plaintiff upon a sidewalk which she claims was not kept reasonably safe and fit for travel. The circuit judge directed a verdict in favor of defendant. The case is brought here by writ of error.
Counsel for the city say in their brief that there is practically but one question, namely: Was the defendant guilty of negligence ? The negligence complained of was the leaving for a long time upon a sidewalk that was traveled by a large number of persons, a flagstone 3£
The plaintiff was not allowed to show the condition of her eyesight. We think this was admissible as bearing upon the question of due care upon her part.
Judgment is reversed, and new trial ordered.