...have already indicated that the act of Toof & Co. was not a wrongful act. Was there competent evidence that the negligence of the defendant was the proximate cause of the damage? The circuit judge found that plaintiff was prevented from entering the employment solely by...

...Wright & Hudson, for appellee. SERVERS, J. 1. The material question presented in this record is whether the negligence of the defendant was the proximate cause of the injury received by the plaintiff. The evidence tended to show that the rails spread, and a portion of the...

...the circumstances exist which create such a duty: 111 US 228; 129 Mass. 364. The question of whether the negligence of the defendant was the proximate cause of the injury should have been submitted to the jury: 94 US 469; 109 SC 122; LR 3 CP 216, 222, 591 ; LR 5 HL 45 ;...

...retard and perhaps prevent a cure, as in this case. If these views are correct, it necessarily follows that the negligence of the defendant was the proximate cause of the whole injury for which the plaintiff recovered damages. This conclusion is sustained by the late case...

...case as above, delivered the opinion of the court. The crucial question in this case is whether or not the negligence of the defendant was the proximate cause of the injury of the plaintiff, so that, in the legal acceptation of that term, it contributed to her hurt. "Causo...

...circumstances. Any service but prompt service would be worthless, so prompt service was required. The jury found that the negligence of the defendant was the proximate cause of the damage suffered by the plaintiff. The defendant must be held to have known the dangerous character...

...circumstances. Any service but prompt service would be worthless, so prompt service was required. The jury found that the negligence of the defendant was the proximate cause of the damage suffered by the plaintiff. The defendant must be held to have known the dangerous character...

...operations afterwards performed, and the suffering occasioned thereby, then and in that case I charge you that the negligence of the defendant was the proximate cause of the injury, for which jihiintiff seeks to recover damages." The court refused to give these requested instructions,...

...which had a defective brake, sufficiently showed that plaintiff was in the discharge of his duties, and that the negligence of the defendant was the proximate cause of the injury. [Ed. Note.— For other cases, see Railroads, Cent. Dig. §§ 910-923; Dec. Dig. § 2S2.*] 2. RAILROADS...

...Wright & Hudson, for appellee. SEEVERS, J. 1. The material question presented in this record is whether the negligence of the defendant was the proximate cause of the injury received by the plaintiff. The evidence tended to show that the rails spread, and a portion of the...