7.15 NEGLIGENCE - CARE REQUIRED
OF PEDESTRIAN ON SIDEWALK Civil Model Jury Charge
(Approved
5/91)
A. In
General
A
pedestrian using the sidewalk must act with the same amount of care for her/his
own protection as a reasonably careful person would have exercised under
similar circumstances. In order to
determine whether or not the pedestrian acted reasonably, you must decide
whether a reasonably careful person would have discovered the danger which
existed in this case and would have avoided it.
Cases:
The above rule applies when the defect is in the
sidewalk itself. Milstrey v.
Hackensack, 6 N.J. 400-414 (1951); Saco v. Hall, 1 N.J.
377 (1949); Kelly v. Limbeck, 86 N.J.L. 471 (Sup. Ct. 1914); Citro
v. Stevens Institute of Technology, 55 N.J. Super. 295 (App.
Div. 1959).
NOTE TO JUDGE
When dealing with structures not necessarily
components of sidewalks, such as drains, grates and cellar doors, the following
section (B) may be found to apply where plaintiff has no prior knowledge
thereof.
B. Artificially
Created Conditions for Private Use
A
pedestrian using the sidewalk is required to exercise reasonable care for
her/his own safety, however, a pedestrian is entitled to assume that there is
no dangerous impediment or pitfall on any part of the sidewalk. The law does not require that a pedestrian
anticipate dangerous conditions. A pedestrian
is not negligent merely because she/he does not look for dangerous conditions;
however, when or if a pedestrian sees or is aware of a dangerous condition,
then she/he must exercise reasonable care to avoid that condition.
[Also See NOTE TO JUDGE under
A. above.]
Cases:
