In determining what is proximate cause, the true rule is that the injury must be the natural and probable consequence of the negligence; such a consequence as, under the surrounding circumstances of the case, might and ought to have been foreseen by the... Pittsburgh Legal Journal - Página 681898Vista completa - Acerca de este libro
| Thomas Gaskell Shearman, Amasa Angell Redfield - 1888 - 720 páginas
...Sharp v. Powell, LR 7 CP 253; Thompson, 1083. "In determining what is proximate cause, the true rule is that the injury must be the natural and probable consequence...under the surrounding circumstances of the case, might and ought to have been foreseen by the •wrong-doer, as likely to flow from his act" (per Paxson,... | |
| 1914 - 1282 páginas
...car. "In determining what is proximate cause, the true rule Is that the Injury must be the natural aud probable consequence of the negligence ; such a consequence...under the surrounding circumstances of the case, might and ought to have been seen by the wrongdoer as likely to flow from his act." Mitchell v. Rochester... | |
| Arkansas. Supreme Court - 1911 - 700 páginas
...68: "In determining whether an act of a defendant is the proximate cause of an injury, the rule is that the injury must be the natural and probable consequence of the act — such a consequence, under the surrounding circumstances of the case, as might and ought to... | |
| New York (State). Marine Court (New York), Daniel T. Robertson, Edward Jacobs - 1889 - 484 páginas
...tho rule as to proximate cause as follows : " In determining what is proximate cause the true rule is that the injury must be the natural and probable consequence...under the surrounding circumstances of the case, might and ought to have been foreseen by the wroug-doer, as likely to now from his act. " Applying this rule... | |
| John Forrest Dillon - 1890 - 894 páginas
...574. 2 Thomps. Neg. 766. The rule as to proximate anil remote causes stated by Paxson, J., to be " that the injury must be the natural and probable consequence...under the surrounding circumstances of the case, might and ought to have benn foreseen by the wrong-doer as likely to flow from his act." Hoag ». Lake Shore... | |
| Pennsylvania. Supreme Court - 1891 - 858 páginas
...lawful duties upon the public highway. The general rule applicable to such cases is thus stated : " The injury must be the natural and probable consequence...under the surrounding circumstances of the case, might and ought to have been seen by the wrong-doer as liable to flow from his act :" Pa. RR v. Hope, 80... | |
| North Carolina. Supreme Court - 1891 - 952 páginas
...instruction the plaintiff excepted. The Court further charged the jury: "To render the defendant liable, the injury must be the natural and probable consequence...of the negligence, such a consequence as, under the circumstances, might or ought to have been foreseen by the wrong-doer as likely to result from his... | |
| 1891 - 932 páginas
...could not have been foreseen by the engineer as the natural and probable consequence of his conduct. The injury must be the natural and probable consequence of the negligence — such a consequence as might and ought to have been foreseen by the wrong-doer as likely to flow from his act. Pennsylvania... | |
| |