SI DEWALK. That part of a public street or highway designed for the use of pedes trians.
As used in this country it does not mean a walk or way constructed of any partic ular kind of material, or in any special man ner, but ordinarily is used to designate that part of the street of a municipality which has been set apart and used for pedestrians, as distinguished from that portion set apart and used for animals and vehicles. Graham v. Albert Lea, 48 Minn. 201, 50 N. W. 1108.
Generally the sidewalk is included with the gutters and roadway in the general term street; Bloomington v. Bay, 42 Ill. 503; In re Burmeister, 76 N. Y. 174; Warner v. Knox, 50 Wis. 429, 7 N. W. 372. It was so held in the construction of a statute provid ing for compensation for damages caused by changing the grade of streets; Kokomo v. Mahan, 100 Ind. 242; and in one authoriz ing the improvement of streets; Wiles v. Ross, 114 Ind. 371, 16 N. E. 800; but in many cases of mun'cipal ordinances and con tracts, the word street is held not to include sidewalks; Dyer v. Chase, 52 Cal. 440; Dick inson v. Worcester, 138 Mass. 555.
It is the duty of a municipal corporation to keep the sidewalks, as well as the roadbed of the street, in repairs Brown v. Chillicothe, 122 Ia. 640, 98 N. W. 502; Pomfrey v. Sara toga Springs, 104 N. Y. 459, 11 N. E. 43; Wall v. Pittsburg, 205 Pa. 48, 54 Atl. 497; Seward v. Wilmington, 2 Marv. •(Del.) 180, 42 Att 451; it is held that proof that a sidewalk was carefully constructed original ly does not absolve the city from its duty of exercising continuous oversight to keep it free from defects or obstructions; City of Muncie v. Hey, 164 Ind. 570, 74 N. E. 250; that sidewalks are constructed the same way in other cities is not a defence; George v. Haverhill, 110 Mass. 506. It is not neces sary to show that the city constructed the walk in question or ordered its constru2tion; Argus v. Sturgis, 86 Mich. 344, 48 N. W. 1085; Hillyer v. Winsted, 77 Conn. 304, 59 Atl. 40; Klein v. Dallas, 71 Tex. 280, 8 S. W. 90; nor to prove title to the property in the city; Still v. Houston, 27 Tex. Civ. App.
447, 66 S. W. 76; nor to prove any formal dedication of the street; Maus v. Springfield, 101 Mo. 613, 14 S. W. 630, 20 St. Rep. 634; nor that it had been accepted by the authori ties of the corporation or to allege the name of the street; Town of Rosedale v. Ferguson, 3 Ind. App. 596, 30 N. E. 156.
If an individual voluntarily' puts down a sidewalk in front of his premises, the city may 'by acquiescence in the act for a suffi cient length of time, and by other acts, ac cept it, together with an obligation to keep it in repair and free from obstructions; Hutchings v. Sullivan, 90 Me. 131, 37 Ad. 883; Graham v. Albert Lea, 48 Minn. 201, 50 N. W. 1108; such acquiescence sufficiently appears where, after the constru,tion of the walk, the city assumes jurisdic ion over it and orders repairs to be made, or where the walk is in a public street and in constant use and in the line of other sidewalks, construct ed by the direction of the city, or over which it has control; Plattsmouth v. Mitchell, 20 Neb. 228, 29 N. W. 593.
A city which permits a citizen to construct a platform over the gutter before his place of business is bound to exercise the same de gree of care toward keeping it in a safe condition for pedestrians as if it had itself constructed it, though not an insurer of its safe condition; Bell v. Henderson, 74 S. W. 206, 24 Ky. L. Rep. 2434. See Elam v. Mt. Sterling, 132 Ky. 657, 117 S. W. 250, 20 L. R.' A. (N. S.) 513. A municipal corporation which permits a walk to be used for public travel is liable for an injury wrongfully caus ed by an obstruction thereon, no matter how the walk came into existence; Saulsbury v. Ithaca, 94 N. Y. 27, 46 Am. Rep. 122; Ponca v. Crawford, 23 Neb. 662, 37 N. W. 609, 8 Am. St. Rep. 144. One who knows of a de fect in the sidewalk is bound to use particu lar care to avoid injury; Koch v. Edgewater, 14 Hun (N. Y.) 544; but knowledge does not defeat recovery, if due care is used ; Gage v. Hornellsville, 2 N. Y. St. Rep. 351.