2 total
Summary judgment denied in falling street sign case; pedestrian claims on untraveled highway portions not barred.
The plaintiff sued the defendant municipality after a street sign fell on him while he was standing on the untraveled portion of a highway.
The plaintiff moved to amend the statement of claim to add public nuisance, which was granted.
Both parties moved for summary judgment on liability.
The court dismissed the defendant's motion, finding that the plaintiff had a reasonable excuse for failing to provide strict written notice under s. 44(10) of the Municipal Act, and that s. 44(8) does not bar pedestrian claims for injuries on untraveled portions of the highway.
The court also dismissed both parties' motions for summary judgment on liability, finding genuine issues for trial regarding the standard of care, foreseeability, and causation.
The court dismissed cross-motions for summary judgment regarding a pedestrian struck by a falling sign.
The plaintiff, Sean Nicholson, claimed damages for injuries sustained when a street sign fell on him.
Three motions were before the court: the plaintiff's motion for leave to amend the Statement of Claim to include public nuisance, the defendant Town of Penetanguishene's motion for summary judgment to dismiss the claim, and the plaintiff's cross-motion for summary judgment on liability.
The court granted the plaintiff leave to amend, finding no prejudice to the defendant.
Both the defendant's motion for summary judgment and the plaintiff's cross-motion for summary judgment were dismissed.
The court found a reasonable excuse for the plaintiff's insufficient notice under the Municipal Act, and interpreted s. 44(8) of the Act not to bar a pedestrian's claim for negligence on untraveled portions of a highway.
The court concluded that genuine issues for trial existed regarding the standard of care, foreseeability, causation, and contributory negligence, precluding summary judgment for either party.
