Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of the State of Colorado Volume 30

Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of the State of Colorado Volume 30

By (author) 

List price: US$22.40

Currently unavailable

Add to wishlist

AbeBooks may have this title (opens in new window).

Try AbeBooks

Description

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1903 edition. Excerpt: ...further than the exercise of his own faculties. Upon these facts and circumstances, a finding can readily be predicated that plaintiff failed to exercise those precautions which reasonably prudent persons confronted with the same danger and laboring under the same difliculty of contending with it, would have exercised in the same circumstances, and that his negligence in this respect was the cause of his injury; in short, that the failure of plaintiff, in the face of conditions which he knew were present, to exercise that degree of care and caution which ordinarily prudent persons would have exercised in the same circumstances, was the proximate cause of his injury. City of Denver v. Hubbard, 29 Colo., 529; 69 Pac., 508; Highlands v. Raine, 23 Colo., 295; Harris v. Uebelhoer, 75 N. Y., 169;Pittman v. City of El Reno, 46 Pac., 495; Elliott on Roads and Streets (2nd ed.), 636; Ham '0. Lewiston, 47 At. Rep., 548.. The trial judge, in determining these questions, has performed the function of a jury, and his findings on these issues are as binding upon us as a verdict of a jury would be where the same issues were involved. Objection is made to the judgment of the court because, it is claimed, the finding on the subject of contributory negligence was not based upon the testimony, but "upon-the consensus of authorities." This claim is without merit. The judgment generally was for the defendant. No provision of the code is cited which requires the court to make a special finding on this issue; but even if it were, the finding was made. The court merely refers to "the consensus of authorities" as supporting its finding, from the testimony, that the plaintifi was guilty of contributory negligence. Other...show more

Product details

  • Paperback | 224 pages
  • 189 x 246 x 12mm | 408g
  • Rarebooksclub.com
  • United States
  • English
  • black & white illustrations
  • 1236969308
  • 9781236969309