 ... one person being in fault will not dispense with another's using ordinary care for himself Two things must concur to support this action. An obstruction in the road by the fault of the defendant, and no want of ordinary care to avoid it on the part...  The Civil-engineer & Surveyor's Manual - Page 72-10by Michael McDermott - 1879 - 586 pagesFull view - About this book
 | Law reports, digests, etc - 1862 - 750 pages
...obstruction of a road : — " Two things must concur to support this action — an •• obstruction on the road, by the fault of the defendant, and no "want of ordinary care on the part of the plaintiff." In other words, between the default of the defendant and the injury,... | |
 | Great Britain. Courts - Law reports, digests, etc - 1855 - 586 pages
...defendant, and the court confirmed the finding; Lord EI.LENBOROUGH saying, amongst other observations, that two things must concur to support this action, an...ordinary care to avoid it on the part of the plaintiff. Here those two things do concur, the wilful erection of these spears by the defendant, for an unlawful... | |
 | Charles Abbott (Baron Tenterden) - Maritime law - 1856 - 996 pages
...another's using ordinary care for himself. Two things must concur to support this action — a collision by the fault of the defendant, and no want of ordinary care to avoid it on the part of the plaintiff ('/). In an action for running down a ship, it appeared that the defendant's ship had the wind free,... | |
 | Joseph Kinnicut Angell, Thomas Durfee - Highway law - 1857 - 484 pages
...against themc One person being in fault will not dispense with another's using ordinary care for himself. Two things must concur to support this action, an...ordinary care to avoid it on the part of the plaintiff," The rule of law thus laid down was entirely approved by Parke, B., in Bridge v. Grand Junction Railway... | |
 | Alfred Conkling - Admiralty - 1857 - 502 pages
...concur: the collision must have been caused by the fault of the opposite party, and there must have been no want of ordinary care to avoid it on the part of the complainant. "The established rules of nautical practice, as explained by professional men, the usages... | |
 | Illinois. Supreme Court - Law reports, digests, etc - 1852 - 820 pages
...and the plaintiff rode furiously along the road and was injured by it. And Lord Ellenborough held: " Two things must concur to support this action an obstruction in the road by the fault of the want of ordinary care on the part of the plaintiff." has been referred to in nearly all the subsequent... | |
 | Wisconsin. Supreme Court, Philip Loring Spooner, Abram Daniel Smith, Obadiah Milton Conover, Frederic King Conover, Frederick William Arthur, Frderick C. Seibold - Law reports, digests, etc - 1861 - 604 pages
...court said, "two things must concur to support this Milwaukee and Chicago Railroad Co. vs. Hunter. action, an obstruction in the road by the fault of the defendant, and no want of ordinary care on the part of the plaintiff." Now, I think this case by no means justifies the doctrine in question.... | |
 | Oliver Lorenzo Barbour, New York (State). Supreme Court - Law reports, digests, etc - 1864 - 716 pages
...care and diligence on his own part." (Lane v. Crombie, 12 Pick. 177. Adams v. Carlisle, 21 id. 146.) " Two things must concur to support this action —...in the road by the fault of the defendant — and nowant of ordinary care to avoid it on the part of the plaintiff." (Buttcrfield v. Forrester [Lord... | |
 | Law reports, digests, etc - 1866 - 570 pages
...being in fault will not dispense with another using ordinary care for himself. " TWO things, he said, " must concur to support this action, an obstruction in the " road by the default of the defendant, and no want of " ordinary care to avoid it on the part of the plaintiff"... | |
 | Charles Abbott (Baron Tenterden) - Maritime law - 1867 - 1180 pages
...another's using ordinary care for himself. Two things must concur to support this action — a collision by the fault of the defendant, and no want of ordinary care to avoid it on the part of the plaintiff (I) . In an action for running down a ship, it appeared that the defendant's ship had the wind free,... | |
| |
