 The true rule is that what is the proximate cause of an Injury is ordinarily a question for the jury. It is not a question of science or legal knowledge. It is to be determined as a fact, in view of the circumstances of fact attending It.  Reports of Cases Determined in the Supreme Court of the Territory of Utah - Side 206av Utah. Supreme Court, Albert Hagan, John Augustine Marshall, John Maxcy Zane, James A. Williams, Joseph M. Tanner, George L. Nye, John Walcott Thompson, August B. Edler, Alonzo Blair Irvine, Harmel L. Pratt, William S. Dalton, H. Arnold Rich - 1908Uten tilgangsbegrensning - Om denne boken
 | Arthur Martin Cathcart - 1912 - 104 sider
...it is ordinarily a question of fact. Said Mr. Justice Strong in a leading case t11 "The true rule is that what is the proximate cause of an injury is ordinarily...question for the jury. It is not a question of science or legal knowledge. It is to be determined as a fact, in view of the circumstances of fact attending it."... | |
 | Joseph Henry Beale - 1915 - 844 sider
...Co. v. Kellogg, 94 US 469, 24 L. ed. 256: "The true rule is that what is the proximate cause of the injury is ordinarily a question for the jury. It is not a question of science or legal knowledge. It is to be determined as a fact in view of the circumstances of fact attending it."... | |
 | Joseph Henry Beale - 1915 - 844 sider
...— ED. cally, that the injury to decedent was not the proximate result of the negligence charged. What is the proximate cause of an injury is ordinarily a question of fact, to be determined by the jury from a consideration of all the attending circumstances. (Pent... | |
 | Francis Hermann Bohlen - 1925 - 1312 sider
...show, specifically, that the injury to decedent was not the proximate result of the negligence charged. What is the proximate cause of an injury is ordinarily a question of fact, to be determined by the jury from a consideration of all the attending circumstances. (Pent... | |
 | 1916 - 1394 sider
...Hurst, 26 Okl. 597, 107 Рас. 661; С., RI & P. Ry. Co. v. Ashlock, 36 Okl. 706, 129 Рас. 726. "The proximate cause of an injury is ordinarily a...science or of legal knowledge. It is to be determined as n question of fact, in view of the circumstances and facts attending it." St. Louis & SF Ry. Co. v.... | |
 | Fred P. Caldwell - 1916 - 1250 sider
...Co. v. Keiffer, 132 Ky. 419, 113 SW 433. "The true rule is that what is the proximate cause of the injury is ordinarily a question for the jury. It is not a question of science or legal knowledge. It is to be determined as a fact in view of the circumstances of fact attending it."... | |
 | 1916 - 1342 sider
...Hurst, 25 Okl. 697, 107 Рас. 661; С., RI ft P. Ry. Co. v. Ashlock, 36 Okl. 706, 129 Рас. 726. "The proximate cause of an injury is ordinarily a question for the jury. It ¡я not a question of science or of legal knowledge. It is to be determined as a question of fact,... | |
 | 1916 - 1268 sider
...v. Kellogg, 94 US 4CÜ, 24 L. Ed. 256. He says: "The true rule is that what is the proximate canse of an injury is ordinarily a question for the jury. It is not n question of science or of leual knowledge. It is to be determined as a fact, in view of tlie circumstances... | |
 | Oklahoma. Supreme Court, Edward Bell Green, Frank Dale, John Henry Burford, Robert Lee Williams, Matthew John Kane, Howard J. Parker, Charles Winfield Van Eaton - 1917 - 768 sider
...for the court. In St. L. & SFR Co. v. Davis, 37 Okla. 345, 132 Pao. .337. Is is said: "The question. What is the proximate cause of an injury? is ordinarily a question for the jury ; but the burden is always on the plaintiff, in an action for personal injuries, to show that the negligence... | |
 | Solomon Stephen Huebner - 1915 - 462 sider
...in its opinion, gave the following rule: "The true rule is that what is the proximate cause of the injury is ordinarily a question for the jury. It is not a question of science or legal knowledge. It is to be determined as a fact, in view of all the circumstances of fact attending... | |
| |
