What people are saying - Write a review
We haven't found any reviews in the usual places.
Other editions - View all
action amount appears appellant applied assessment authority Bank benefit bridge building cause charge Chicago claim condition Constitution construction contract corporation cost County court damages decision defendant determine direct discharge district drainage duty effect entitled evidence exercise existence fact formed further give given grant ground held hold injury joint judge judgment jury land liable limits Mass matter means ment Minn municipal nature necessary negligence Ohio operation opinion owner paid party pass payment person plaintiff present question reason received recover release result river rule satisfaction sewer statute stream street suit superintendence supply taken thereof tion toll tort tort feasors track trespass witnesses
Page 400 - It is admitted that the rule is difficult of application. But it is generally held that, in order to warrant a finding that negligence or an act not amounting to wanton wrong is the proximate cause of an injury, it must appear that the injury was the natural and probable consequence of the negligence or wrongful act, and that it ought to have been foreseen in the light of the attending circumstances.
Page 154 - No person shall, for the same offence, be twice put in jeopardy of his life or limb, nor shall any man's property be taken or applied to public use without the consent of his representatives, and without just compensation being previously made to him.
Page 34 - By reason of the negligence of any person in the service of the employer intrusted with and exercising superintendence whose sole or principal duty is that of superintendence...
Page 374 - Property shall be assessed for taxes under general laws, and by uniform rules, according to its true value.
Page 129 - ... the contributory negligence of the party injured will not defeat the action, if it be shown that the defendant might, by the exercise of reasonable care and prudence, have avoided the consequences of the injured party's negligence.
Page 400 - But when there is no intermediate efficient cause, the original wrong must be considered as reaching to the effect, and proximate to it. The inquiry must, therefore, always 26—65 KAN. Railway Co. v. Columbia. be whether there was any intermediate cause disconnected from the primary fault, and self-operating, which produced the injury.
Page 278 - These laws are general and uniform, not because they operate upon every person in the state, for they do not, but because every person who is brought within the relation and circumstances provided for is affected by the law.
Page 131 - The burden rested upon the plaintiff to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the negligence of the defendant was the proximate cause of the decedent's injury.
Page 278 - The true distinction, therefore, is, between the delegation of power to make the law, which necessarily involves a discretion as to what it shall be, and conferring an authority or discretion as to its execution, to be exercised under and in pursuance of the law. The first cannot be done; to the latter no valid objection can be made.