 It appears to us that the proper question for the jury in this case, and indeed in all others of the like kind, is, whether the damage was occasioned entirely by the negligence or improper conduct of the defendant, or whether the plaintiff himself so...  Commentaries on American Law - Page 342by James Kent - 1884Full view - About this book
 | 1893 - 1324 pages
...jury. When the defense in a case like this is contributory negligence, the proper question for the jury is whether the damage was occasioned entirely by the...of the defendant, or whether the plaintiff himself ко fnr contributed to the misfortune by hin own negligence or want of ordinary or common care and... | |
 | Virginia. Supreme Court of Appeals - 1887 - 1016 pages
...in Tuff v. Warman, 5 CB (NS), 573, the leading case on the subject, is that where the plaintiff has so far contributed to the misfortune by his own negligence or want of ordinary and common care, that, but for such negligence or want of ordinary care and caution on his part, the misfortune would... | |
 | 1887 - 1058 pages
...in the same connection, the. result depends upon the facts. The question in such cases is — First, whether the damage was occasioned entirely by the...negligence or improper conduct of the defendant; or, second, whether the plaintiff himself so far contributed to the misfortune by his own negligence or... | |
 | District of Columbia. Supreme Court (1863-1936), Franklin Hubbell Mackey - 1887 - 640 pages
...the plaintiff himself so far contributed to the accident by his own negligence or want of ordinary care and caution that, but for such negligence or want of ordinary care and caution on his part the accident would not have happened, the plaintiff cannot recover and... | |
 | North Carolina. Supreme Court - 1888 - 692 pages
...Justice in Turrentine v. The Railroad, 92 NC, 638. It is there said that the question for the jury is: " Whether the damage was occasioned entirely by...common care and caution, that but for such negligence and want of ordinary care and caution on his part, the misfortune would not have happened? " In the... | |
 | Thomas McIntyre Cooley - 1888 - 1060 pages
...to as that the proper question for the jury in this case, and indeed in all others of the like kind, is, whether the damage was occasioned entirely by...whether the plaintiff himself so far contributed to the misfortnne by his own negligence or want of ordinary or common care and caution, that but for such... | |
 | 1888 - 912 pages
...ordinarily have done, or in doing what he would not have done. The question in such cases is: First, whether the damage was occasioned entirely by the negligence or improper conduct of the defendants; or, second, whether the plaintiff himself so far contributed to the misfortune, by his... | |
 | Abraham Clark Freeman - 1889 - 1018 pages
...court of the United States as follows: — " The question in such cases is: 1. Whether the damage is occasioned entirely by the negligence or improper conduct of the defendant; or 2. Whether the plaintiff himself so far contributed to the misfortune by his own negligence or want... | |
 | Frederick Pollock - 1890 - 694 pages
...Chamber. In the considered judgment on appeal (//) it is said that the proper question for the jury is " whether the damage was occasioned entirely by...that, but for such negligence or want of ordinary care and caution on his part, the misfortune would not have happened." But negligence will not disentitle... | |
| |
