...was, therefore, decided, that he could not recover ; for that two things must concur to support the action : an obstruction in the road by the fault of the defendant, and no want of p. 35o ordinary care, to avoid it, on the part of the plaintiff. Upon the | principle of these cases,...

...against them. One person being at 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." Among earlier cases in the English Court of King's Bench some of the decisions go so far as to hold...

...due care for himself. Two things must concur to support this action : an obstruction in the highway, and no want of ordinary care to avoid it on the part of the plaintiff."2 In Butterfield v. Forrester, the defendant was not present at the time and place of the...

...trial, said : " One person being in fault will not dispense with another's using due care for himself. Two things must concur to support this action : an obstruction in the highway, and no want of ordinary care to avoid it on the part of the plaintiff."2 In Butterfield v....

...not dispense with another's using ordinary care for himself. Two things must concur to support the action, an obstruction in the road, by the fault of...ordinary care to avoid It on the part of the plaintiff." The rule laid down in that case has been ever since followed in the courts, of that country and of...

...with another's using care for himself. Two things must concur to support this action: an obstniction in the road by the fault of the defendant, and no...ordinary care to avoid it on the part of the plaintiff." The policy of the law behind the doctrine of contributory negligence is to place upon all members of...

...support an action by the hirer based upon such fault or defect. First, fault of the bailor, and second, no want of ordinary care to avoid it on the part of the hirer. If such fault or defect only created a dangerous passive condition and the subsequent want of...

...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...ordinary care to avoid it on the part of the plaintiff. Per Curiam, rule refused. SPEAR, J., in Cincinnati Traction Co. v. Forrest, (1905) 73 Ohio 1, 75 NE...

...right. . . . One person being in fault will not dispense with another's using ordinary care for himself. Two things must concur to support this action —...ordinary care to avoid it on the part of the plaintiff.' " Wheat v. St. Louis, 179 Mo. 572, 78 SW 790, 64 L. RA 292. "A city may not leave open to travel by...

...says: " 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...want of ordinary care to, avoid it on the part of ithe plaintiff." j*° S . "~.ft*&~~~* ~~~ ****• " ^* Y&~ j^uj'n '' f <^*~/P *' r ^ ***A £**•-*—%<»...