The Law of Electricity: A Treatise on the Rules of the Law Relating to Telegraphs, Telephones, Electric Lights, Electric Railways, and Other Electric Appliances

Forside
Central Law Journal Company, 1891 - 525 sider
 

Innhold

Regulation against use of instrument by rival company
119
INJURIES TO THEIR OWN EMPLOYEES
122
CHAPTER V
129
Compelled by mandamus to serve the public equally
136
Statutes enforcing this obligation
158
CHAPTER VI
160
View that they are liable for a high degree of diligence
166
Not liable for cashing fictitious money order
173
CHAPTER VII
179
Burden of proof as to necessity
194
paid for transmission
200
213
213
View that sender is bound by rules of whose existence
226
Cases of exoneration under this rule
227
STIPULATIONS AND LIMITATIONS AS TO TIME
260
negligence of connecting lineschange
267
CHAPTER X
277
What evidence relevant on this question
292
Transmission through repeat
294
ing offices
298
Question how affected by the hours of closing the com panys office
299
What excuses insufficient
300
Whether plaintiff injured by the delay a question for the jury
301
Delay by changing route in consequence of bad weather
302
CHAPTER XI
303
of the parties
304
That rule as explained in a leading case in New York
306
Special circumstances must be communicated to the com pany 308
308
English case in illustration of the rule
309
Conclusions flowing from these rules
310
PROXIMATE AND REMOTE DAMAGES SECTION PAGE 318 Only direct or proximate damages recoverable
312
Intervening fraud of a third person
314
Nondelivery of message asking for information
316
Error in message notifying date of trial of a cause
318
Nondelivery of a message requesting postponement of a judicial trial
319
Other instances of damages too remote
320
Loss of fee by a professional man
321
Losing a chance of obtaining employment
322
Nebraska statute
324
Loss of opportunity to save debt by attachment 325
325
Operator fraudulently withholding message announcing failure of bank
327
CHAPTER XII
393
subsequent negligence
396
When not bound to notify company of error
397
Reselling and charging company with difference
398
Plaintiff not bound to invest further money
399
Contributory negligence of the sender
400
CHAPTER XIII
402
Even in the case of malfeasance
403
Unsoundness and injustice of the English rule
404
Exception where sender is agent of the addressee
405
View which sustains the right of action in the addressee
406
Action by addressee for mistake
407
Illustration of these views
408
When the addresse must sue in tort
409
Where the sender is agent of a third person principal may sue
410
Broker transmitting message for principal and suing in his own name
413
Stranger to both sender and addressee
416
Action over by sender for damages sustained by receiver and recovered from the company
418
Under Indiana statutes giving penalties
419
SECTION
422
SECTION
428
SECTION
435
Telegram a memorandum under statute of frauds
437
Another illustration
448
Has evidentiary effect of a letter
466
Real property
468
Injunction against the use of telegraph ciphers
469
Municipal taxation of telegraph companies outside of city limits
470
What municipal and State taxation interferes with inter state commerce
471
Leasing line and breach of contract for continuous business
472
Application of the rule in Hadley v Baxendale to unintel
484
Question as depending upon priority of occupancy
492
Futility of attempts at statutory regulation
501
No penalty for refusing to transmit obscene messages
508
Immaterial special findings
510
Cannot limit liability for gross negligence
517
Further of the Massachusetts doctrine
518
A contrary view
522
What delay evidence of negligence
524
Opphavsrett

Andre utgaver - Vis alle

Vanlige uttrykk og setninger

Populære avsnitt

Side 101 - We think that the true rule of law is that the person who, for his own purposes, brings on his land and collects and keeps there anything likely to do mischief if it escapes, must keep it in at his peril ; and if he does not do so, is prima facie answerable for all the damage which is the natural consequence of its escape.
Side 305 - ... such as may fairly and reasonably be considered either arising naturally ie, according to the usual course of things, from such breach of contract itself, or such as may reasonably be supposed to have been in the contemplation of both parties at the time they made the contract, as the probable result of the breach of it.
Side 305 - But, on the other hand, if these special circumstances were wholly unknown to the party breaking the contract, he at the most could only be supposed to have had in his contemplation the amount of injury which would arise generally, and in the great multitude of cases not affected by any special circumstances...
Side 59 - That any telegraph company now organized, or which may hereafter be organized under the laws of any State in this Union, shall have the right to construct, maintain, and operate lines of telegraph through and over any portion of the public domain of the United States...
Side 5 - An act to aid in the construction of telegraph lines, and to secure to the Government the use of the same for postal, military, and other purposes...
Side 305 - Where two parties have made a contract, which one of them has broken, the damages which the other party ought to receive, in respect of such breach of contract, should be such as may fairly and reasonably be considered either arising naturally, ie according to the usual course of things, from such breach of contract itself, or such as may reasonably be supposed to have been in the contemplation of both parties at the time they made the contract, as the probable result...
Side 278 - There must be reasonable evidence of negligence, but where the thing is shown to be under the management of the defendant or his servants, and the accident is such as in the ordinary course of things does not happen if those who have the management use proper care, it affords reasonable evidence, in the absence of explanation by the defendant that the accident arose from want of care.
Side 305 - ... special circumstances were wholly unknown to the party breaking the contract, he at the most could only be supposed to have had in his contemplation the amount of injury which would arise generally, and in the great multitude of cases not affected by any special circumstances, from such a breach of contract. For, had the special circumstances been known, the parties might have specially provided for the breach of contract by special terms as to the damages in that case; and of this advantage...
Side 406 - the general rule of law is that a person who is not a party to a simple contract, and from whom no consideration moves, cannot sue on the contract, and that, consequently, a promise made by one person to another, for the benefit of a third person who is a stranger to the consideration, will not support an action by the latter...
Side 236 - ... nor for mistakes or delays in the transmission or delivery, or for non-delivery, of any repeated message beyond fifty times the sum received for sending the same, unless specially insured; nor in any case for delays arising from unavoidable interruption in the working of its lines, or for errors in cipher or obscure messages...

Bibliografisk informasjon