375 N.E.2d 763 (1978)
- Appellant municipality sought review of judgment in appellees' favor, in a personal injury action where appellee's child was severely injured while crossing the street from school.
- Appellee argued she relied upon appellant's prior provision of school crossing guards and the failure to do so on the day of the accident constituted negligence.
- Appellant argued a municipality acting in its governmental capacity was not liable for failure to furnish adequate protection.
- The court rejected appellant's argument and affirmed, concluding that a municipality whose police department voluntarily assumed a duty to supervise school crossings could be held liable for the negligent omission to provide a guard at the designated crossing or notify the school to take other appropriate action.
- The court determined that appellant undertook a special duty for the benefit of a limited class of children crossing, to supervise the crossings or notify of the inability to do so as required under precinct regulations.
- Having voluntarily assumed the duty, appellant had an obligation to continue its performance non-negligently.
- The court noted that appellee relied on the protection afforded.
The court affirmed the judgment because appellant municipality voluntarily undertook a special duty to supervise school crossings for the benefit of children and was liable for failure to adequately furnish such protection.
Suggested Study Aids For Tort Law