Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 21.pdf/99

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page needs to be proofread.

82

The Green Bag

NEGLIGENCE. (Absence of headlight.) N. 0.—Absence of a headlight on a dark night is held, in Morrow v. Southern R. Co., 61 S. E. 621, 16 L. R. A. (N. S.) 642, not to render negligent per se a failure to give signals for highway crossings with respect to the rights of a person walking on the track, near the crossing; although, if he was where people are accustomed to walk, absence of headlight and signals may be considered by the jury as some evidence that the train was not care fully operated or proper warning given of its approach. NEGLIGENCE. (Contributory negligence may not exonerate defendant.) Okla.— Although the rule is that, even if the defend ant be shown to have been guilty of negli gence, the plaintiff cannot recover if he him self be shown to have been guilty of con tributory negligence which may have had something to do in causing the accident, it is held, in Atchison, T. fir* S. F. R. Co. v. Baker, 95 Pac. 433, 16 L. R. A. (N. S.) 825, that the contributory negligence will not exonerate the defendant and disentitle the plaintiff from recovering if it be shown that the defendant might, by the exercise of reason able care and prudence, have avoided the consequences of plaintiff's negligence. NEGLIGENCE. (Damage by rear end of street car rounding curve.) Ky.—A street car company is held, in South Covington cV* C. Street R. Co. v. Besse, 33 Ky. L. Rep. 52, 108 S. W. 848, 16 L. R. A. (N. S.) 890, not to be liable for injury to a person whose wagon is struck by the hind end of a car swinging away from the track in a natural manner when passing around a curve, since it is the duty of persons driving on the street to avoid such collisions. NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS. (Maker may bring trover against payee.) Ga.—The right of the maker of a negotiable promissory note to maintain trover against the payee after the note is fully paid, if the latter, hav ing the note in his possession, refuses to deliver it to the maker upon demand, or if, after payment, the payee disposes of the note, is sustained in Long v. Mcintosh, 129 Ga. 660, 59 S. E. 779, 16 L. R. A. (N. S.) 1043.

PUBLIC SERVICE CORPORATIONS. (Ordinance to compel stopping of interurban cars.) O.—The power of a municipality to require by penal ordinance the stopping of interurban cars to take on and to discharge passengers is denied in Townsend v. Circleville, 78 Ohio St. 122, 84 N. E. 792, 16 L. R. A. (N. S.) 914, although its power to regulate the speed of such cars within its territory is admitted. RIPARIAN OWNERS. (Damages due to extraordinary conditions.) Vt.—A railway company is held, in Eagan v. Central Ver mont R. Co., 69 Atl. 732, 16 L. R. A. (N. S.) 928, not to be liable for injuries to the prop erty of a riparian owner by water thrown thereon by the overflow of the stream, the water of which cannot, because of a storm so extraordinary in character that it has had but one precedent in forty years, escape through its culvert. TRESPASS. (No injury when needed to preserve life.) Vt.—While plaintiff with his wife and small children was on Lake Champlain in a loaded sloop, a violent storm arose. Desiring to escape the hazard of the open water, plaintiff moored his boat to defendant's dock. Thereupon defendant's servant cast the boat off. It was caught in the tempest and driven ashore. The occupants were thrown into the water or on to the shore and injured. The cargo was lost. The Supreme Court of Vermont in Ploof v. Putnam, 71 Atl. Rep. 188, decided that even had the act of mooring the boat been a trespass it was the duty of defendant to refrain from casting it off until the fury of the gale had abated, as the preservation of human life was of paramount importance. WILLS. (Dying declaration for the jury.) Ore.—Whether or not a dying declaration which has been admitted in evidence was made under such belief of impending death as to entitle it to the credit usually given to statements of one in extremis who has no hope of recovery is held, in State v. Doris (Ore.), 94 Pac. 44, 16 L. R. A. (N. S.) 660, to be for the jury where the evidence must be weighed.