Michigan Reports (Volume 145); Cases Decided in the Supreme Court of Michigan (Paperback)


This historic book may have numerous typos, missing text or index. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. 1907. Not illustrated. Excerpt: ... was, because of the inconsiderate action of the crowd which had been attracted by the music, pushed in front of a backing train and killed. It was held that whether the degree of care exercised was commensurate with the duty imposed presented a question of fact peculiarly within the province of the jury. The case of Taylor v. Pennsylvania Co., 50 Fed. 755, is very suggestive: The suit was for damages sustained by the plaintiff in the Union Depot in Pittsburgh, while she was about to pass out of one of the exit gates through which the passengers were required to go to reach the cars. The depot was under the control of the defendant company. There was a large crowd gathered in Pittsburgh to attend a celebration. She waited in a large vestibule at the depot to take the cars from the depot home, and the crowd packed in around and behind her. One of the gates opening from the vestibule where she was waiting was opened for passengers to take the cars, and the crowd began to move, and she moved with it. When she reached an iron railing, constructed to turn people to the narrow exit of the gateway, she was, by a sudden surging of the throng, forced and jammed against the railing and injured; and the case having been submitted to the jury, a verdict was returned for the plaintiff. The court in disposing of the case used the following language: "Did the defendant exercise ordinary care in providing a suitable force of officers and employes to properly control and direct the movement of the unprecedented throng which it was advised would crowd through its depot rooms, vestibules, corridors, and gates to reach its trains? "The only remaining question, therefore, is, Did the defendant exercise ordinary care in providing a suitable force to properly control and direct the mov...

R901

Or split into 4x interest-free payments of 25% on orders over R50
Learn more

Discovery Miles9010
Mobicred@R84pm x 12* Mobicred Info
Free Delivery
Delivery AdviceOut of stock

Toggle WishListAdd to wish list
Review this Item

Product Description

This historic book may have numerous typos, missing text or index. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. 1907. Not illustrated. Excerpt: ... was, because of the inconsiderate action of the crowd which had been attracted by the music, pushed in front of a backing train and killed. It was held that whether the degree of care exercised was commensurate with the duty imposed presented a question of fact peculiarly within the province of the jury. The case of Taylor v. Pennsylvania Co., 50 Fed. 755, is very suggestive: The suit was for damages sustained by the plaintiff in the Union Depot in Pittsburgh, while she was about to pass out of one of the exit gates through which the passengers were required to go to reach the cars. The depot was under the control of the defendant company. There was a large crowd gathered in Pittsburgh to attend a celebration. She waited in a large vestibule at the depot to take the cars from the depot home, and the crowd packed in around and behind her. One of the gates opening from the vestibule where she was waiting was opened for passengers to take the cars, and the crowd began to move, and she moved with it. When she reached an iron railing, constructed to turn people to the narrow exit of the gateway, she was, by a sudden surging of the throng, forced and jammed against the railing and injured; and the case having been submitted to the jury, a verdict was returned for the plaintiff. The court in disposing of the case used the following language: "Did the defendant exercise ordinary care in providing a suitable force of officers and employes to properly control and direct the movement of the unprecedented throng which it was advised would crowd through its depot rooms, vestibules, corridors, and gates to reach its trains? "The only remaining question, therefore, is, Did the defendant exercise ordinary care in providing a suitable force to properly control and direct the mov...

Customer Reviews

No reviews or ratings yet - be the first to create one!

Product Details

General

Imprint

General Books LLC

Country of origin

United States

Release date

2012

Availability

Supplier out of stock. If you add this item to your wish list we will let you know when it becomes available.

First published

2012

Authors

Dimensions

246 x 189 x 14mm (L x W x T)

Format

Paperback - Trade

Pages

256

ISBN-13

978-1-154-18784-7

Barcode

9781154187847

Categories

LSN

1-154-18784-5



Trending On Loot