City Wins Dismissal in Sidewalk Defect Trial

Municipal Highway Defect / Sidewalk Trip-and-Fall

After a full bench trial, city wins 13a-149 sidewalk case for lack of proof on the statute’s elements

A pedestrian sued the City of Hartford under the municipal highway defect statute, General Statutes § 13a-149, alleging she tripped and fell on an uneven Main Street sidewalk and was injured. After the plaintiff presented her evidence at a court (non-jury) trial, including her own testimony and a city employee’s testimony plus photos and medical records, the City moved under Practice Book § 15-8 to dismiss for failure to establish a prima facie case. The court agreed, finding that the plaintiff “failed to meet her burden to prove all essential elements of the municipal highway defect statute.” The decision walks through the four elements from Nicefaro v. New Haven: (1) a defect in the highway; (2) actual or constructive notice; (3) failure to remedy within a reasonable time; and (4) that the defect was the sole proximate cause, meaning the plaintiff must also prove freedom from contributory negligence.  For the first element, the court relied on Bovat v. Waterbury, defining a defect as “any object in… the traveled path, which would necessarily obstruct or hinder one in the use of the road… or which, from its nature and position, would be likely to produce that result.”  Here, the plaintiff proved only that one sidewalk slab was slightly higher than the next, offered no measurements, and offered no expert testimony or other evidence that the condition violated any standard or code. The court concluded that this slight height difference, without more, did not constitute a proven “defect” and that the plaintiff failed to prove the essential statutory elements. Smith v. City of Hartford, No. HHD-CV-23-6170009-S (Conn. Super. Ct. Nov. 4, 2025).