...against them. 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...of the defendant, and no want of ordinary care to ai-oid it on the part of the plaintiff." Of the propriety, to say nothing of the prudence, of one man's...

...law is laid down by Lord Ellenborough, in a similar case (fiutterßeld v. Furreiter, 11 East, 60): "Two things must concur to support this action, an...obstruction in the road by the fault of the defendant anil no want of ordinary care to avoid it on the part of the plaintiff.1' Any ordinary person going...

...Procter v. Harris, 4 C. Sj P. 337, ante, 578). Two things must concur to support this action, — anob road by the fault of the defendant, and no want of ordinary c it on the part of the plaintiff. (Butter/kid v. Forrester, 11 . per Lord Ellenborough ; Marriott...

...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 (a). In an action on the case for running down a ship, it appeared that the defendant's ship had the...

...them. One person's being in fault will not dispense with another's using ordinary care for himself. — Two things must concur, to support this action —...road by the fault of the defendant, and no want of ordiBrown v. Pontchartrain Railroad Company. nary care to avoid it on the part of the plainliff." This...

...another's using ordinary '¿re for himself. Two things must concur to sup, -rt this action, a collision by the fault of the defendant, and no want of ordinary care to avoid it on the part of the defendant. Abb. Sh. 2:i8. •. In an action by a plaintiff for injury done to liU теэк! by collision,...

...ordinarycare for himself. Two things must concur to support this action, a collision by the fault vf the defendant, and no want of ordinary care to avoid it on the part of the defendant. Abb. Sh. 238. 3. In an action by a plaintiff for injury done to his vessel by collision,...

...ordinary care and caution in the other. 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. (Abb. on Shipp. 208, 6th. ed.) This appears to have been the principle on which this court acted in...

...using ordinary care for himself. Two things must concur to support this action — an obstruction on the road by the fault of the defendant, and no want...ordinary care to avoid it on the part of the plaintiff. In Handysidc v. Wilson it was urged by counsel that, there was no law of the sea or the road, by which...

...do not himself use common and ordinary caution to be in the right. 206 Irwin vs. Sprigg. — 1847. " Two things must concur to support this action : an...ordinary care to avoid it on the part of the plaintiff." Plower vs. Adam, 2 Taunt. 314. Lane vs. Crombie, 12 Pick. 177. It appears that under the law, as thus...