Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Law
Conflict Of Laws - Guest Motorists -How Far Is The Lex Loci Delicti Controlling In The Forum?, M. M. Howard
Conflict Of Laws - Guest Motorists -How Far Is The Lex Loci Delicti Controlling In The Forum?, M. M. Howard
Michigan Law Review
Before the advent of the "guest statutes," the decisions of all but a very few states recognized no degrees of negligence and measured the duty of the automobile host towards his non-paying guest by due care under all the circumstances-the "ordinary negligence" rule. In the few exceptional states, the decisions required the plaintiff to prove "gross," "wilful," or "wanton" negligence on the part of his host in order to maintain his action. And within the last decade nineteen states have adopted "guest statutes" which, with varying language, adopt the "gross negligence" rule. Since the rule of the lex loci delicti …
Torts - Liability Of Power Company To Resident For Non-Performance Of Contract With City To Keep Street Light Burning, Paul R. Trigg
Torts - Liability Of Power Company To Resident For Non-Performance Of Contract With City To Keep Street Light Burning, Paul R. Trigg
Michigan Law Review
Defendant public utility was under contract to a municipality to light the streets. Plaintiff, a local resident, was injured in an automobile collision which, he alleged, was caused by defendant's negligent failure to keep a certain street light burning. Defendant demurred. Held, that the demurrer was properly sustained. Tollison v. Georgia Power Co., 53 Ga. App. 795, 187 S. E. 181 (1936).
Damages - Personal Injury - Negligent Aggravation By Injured Person, Michigan Law Review
Damages - Personal Injury - Negligent Aggravation By Injured Person, Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
As a direct result of the defendant's negligence, "plaintiff fell and sustained injuries including a fracture of the pubic bone. Ten months later, knowing that she could not walk unassisted because the bone had not knit, plaintiff attempted to do so, fell and refractured the bone. Held, that plaintiff's negligence, found as a matter of law, was an "efficient intervening cause" making the defendant's negligence remote as to the aggravation of the injury. S.S. Kresge Co. v. Kenney, (App. D. C. 1936) 86 F. (2d) 651.
Master And Servant - Action By Employer Against Chauffeur, Michigan Law Review
Master And Servant - Action By Employer Against Chauffeur, Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
The owner of an automobile suffered personal injury and injury to his car when his chauffeur ran into another vehicle. Held, in overruling defendant's demurrer, that an employer has a cause of action against his chauffeur for negligence, there being no grounds. of policy against such an action and there being no joint enterprise and hence no negligence imputed to the employer. Darman v. Zilch, (R. I. 1936) 186 A. 21.
Automobiles - Statutory Liability Of Owner - Registered Titleholder Estopped To Deny Ownership, Michigan Law Review
Automobiles - Statutory Liability Of Owner - Registered Titleholder Estopped To Deny Ownership, Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
Plaintiffs, injured in New York by an automobile driven by defendant's minor son, sued under a New York statute which makes the owner of an automobile liable for damages for injuries resulting from negligence of its operator. The automobile was registered in Connecticut in defendant's name to avoid compliance with the Connecticut statute which requires proof of financial responsibility as a prerequisite of registration for minors over sixteen years of age. Held, defendant estopped to prove ownership of the automobile in his son. Shuba v. Greendonner, 271 N. Y. 189, 2 N. E. (2d) 536 (1936), reversing 245 …
Master And Servant - Independent Contractor - Salesman As Servant Or Independent Contractor, Milton M. Howard
Master And Servant - Independent Contractor - Salesman As Servant Or Independent Contractor, Milton M. Howard
Michigan Law Review
Plaintiff was injured as a result of a collision between his automobile and one being driven by N. N was a traveling salesman for defendant company and plaintiff sued both N and the company. It was held that, under the facts of the case, while N had been negligent, and was therefore liable, defendant company was not liable, for N was an independent contractor. Holloway v. Nassar, 276 Mich. 212, 267 N. W. 619 (1936).