The opinion describes detailed information plaintiff provided to help solve a variety of cases. And a further illustration. Beyond a certain point, it cannot be traced, and such is proximate cause, "because of convenience, of public policy, of a rough sense of justice, the law arbitrarily declines to trace a series of events beyond a certain point.
Except for doing historical research, a more convenient way to access federal statutes is to use the U. However, a few decisions of trial courts in the USA are published: Out of this wrong to property, which threatened injury to nothing else, there has passed, we are told, to the plaintiff by derivation or succession a right of action for the invasion of an interest of another order, the right to bodily security.
Harm to some one being the natural result of the act, not only that one alone, but all those in fact injured may complain. Surveys of the right-of-way were completed in May One man was carrying a nondescript package.
In —76 a wealthy Whitestone, New York rubber baron named Conrad Poppenhusen acquired all the railroads. Collodion silver glass wet plate negative.
In the case supposed it is said, and said correctly, that the chauffeur is liable for the direct effect of the explosion although he had no reason to suppose it would follow a collision. C had the right to sit in his office, secure from such dangers.
And surely, given such an explosion as here it needed no great foresight to predict that the natural result would be to injure one on the platform at no greater distance from its scene than was the plaintiff.
Whether by flying fragments, by broken glass, by wreckage of machines or structures no one could say. All judges, however can develop empathy. Edit Cardozo, in the majority, gives consideration to the fact that the workers had no way of knowing the contents of the parcel, and even then they could not reasonably have foreseen this outcome.
He traced the history of the law of negligence, a concept not known in medieval times, and noted that it evolved as an offshoot of the law of trespassand one could not sue for trespass to another. Justice HOLMES many years ago, "the measure of the defendant's duty in determining whether a wrong has been committed is one thing, the measure of liability when a wrong has been committed is another.
Where a railroad is required to fence its tracks against cattle, no man's rights are injured should he wander upon the road because such fence is absent. Though some state courts outside New York approved it, others did not, sometimes feeling that foreseeability was an issue for the jury to consider.
Her former attorney, Wood, maintained a law office in the Woolworth Building until his death in at age B, sitting in a window of a building opposite, is cut by flying glass. To whom does a party owe a duty of care.
One exception includes unexpected consequences. Of course, the wise and legitimate alternative is to slow down and proceed cautiously but those words of wisdom are normally much quieter than the drums of profit and capitalism.
The opinion omitted the nature of her injury, the amount of damages that she sought, and the size of the jury award. A duty that is owed must be determined from the risk that can reasonably be foreseen under the circumstances. The concussion broke some scales standing a considerable distance away.
A licensee or trespasser upon my land has no claim to affirmative care on my part that the land be made safe. A chauffeur negligently collides with another car which is filled with dynamite, although he could not know it.
C's injury and that of the baby were directly traceable to the collision. Not because of tenderness toward him we say he need not answer for all that follows his wrong. Leave it to insurance coverage guru/legal humorist Randy Maniloff to track down the most interesting cases for his monthly publication, Coverage Opinions.
Among this month’s excellent articles (which include a mock interview with Tom Brady), Randy revisits his insurance Coverage for Dummies contest with the case of Blank-Greer v. Tannerite. Palsgraf v.
Long Island R. Co. Search. Table of Contents. Torts Keyed to Dobbs. Add to Library. Law Dictionary. CASE BRIEFS. Law Dictionary Featuring Black's Law Dictionary, 2nd Ed. Search. The Plaintiff was standing on a railroad platform purchasing a ticket, when a train stopped and two men ran forward to catch it.
One of the men nearly. We possess one of the largest legal case databases in the UK offering case notes and summaries across a wide variety of subjects. A man was getting on to a moving train owned by the Long Island Railroad Company. Seeming unsteady, two workers of the company tried to assist him onto the train and accidentally knocked his parcel out of his hands.
The parcel contained fireworks wrapped in newspaper which went off when they hit Year: The explosion caused weight scales to fall on the other end of the platform. These scales hit Palsgraf, causing injury. She sued Long Island Railroad Company (LIRR). In applying the Palsgraf v.
Long Island Railroad Co. decision to this case, Phillip would: lose because, although the mechanic's conduct was negligent toward Marsha, it was not a wrong in relation to Phillip, who was far away.Palsgraf v long island railroad co