Torts Quotes

js5389's version from 2016-05-09 01:47


Question Answer
Buch v. Amory ManufacturingSuppose A, standing close by a railroad, sees a two-year-old babe on the track and a car approaching. He can easily rescue the child with entire safety to himself, and the instincts of humanity require him to do so. If he does not, he may, perhaps, justly be styled a ruthless savage and a moral monster; but he is not liable in damages for the child’s injury, or indictable under the statute for its death.
Winterbottom v. WrightUnless we confine the operation of such contracts as to the parties who entered into them, the most absurd and outrageous consequences, to which I can see no limit, would ensue.
MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co.We hold, then, that the principle of Thomas v. Winchester is not limited to poisons, explosives, and things of like nature, to things which in their normal operation are implements of destruction. If the nature of a thing is such that it is reasonably certain to place life and limb in peril when negligently made, it is then a thing of danger.
Escola v. Coca ColaI believe that manufacturer’s negligence should no longer be singled out as the basis of a plaintiff’s right to recover in cases like the present one.
Escola v. Coca ColaIt is to the public interest to discourage the marketing of products having defects that are a menace to the public.
In re 9/11Courts traditionally “fix the duty point by balancing factors, including the reasonable expectations of parties and society generally, the proliferation of claims, the likelihood of unlimited or insurer-like liability, disproportionate risk and reparation allocation, and public policies affecting the expansion or limitation of new channels of liability.”
In re PolemisThe appellants’ junior counsel sought ot draw a distinction between the anticipation of the extent of damage resulting from a negligent act, and the anticipation of the type of damage resulting from such an act.
Fletcher v. RylandsI can see no reason why damage to real property should be governed by a different rule or principle than damge to personal property.
Brown v. CollinsEven if the arbitrary test were applied only to things which a man brings on his land, it would still recognize the peculiar rights of savage life in a wilderness, ignore the rights growing out of a civilized state of society, make a distinction not warranted by the enlightened spirit of the common law: it would impose a penalty upon efforts, made in a reasonable, skillful, and careful manner.
Kennedy v. Parrottthe surgeon may extend the operation to remedy any abnormal or diseased condition in the area of the original incision whenever he, in the exercise of his sound professional judgment, determines that correct surgical procedure dictates…
Canterbury v. Spencethe standard measuring performance of that duty [to disclose] by physicians, as y others, is conduct which is reasonable under the circumstances.
Martin v. Herzog…the safeguards prescribed by law for the benefit of another that he may be preserved in life or limb, is to fall short of the standard of diligence to which those who live in organized society are under a duty to conform
Pokora v. Wabash Ry.Illustrations such as these bear witness to the need for caution in framing standards of behavior that amount ot rules of law.
Union Stock Yardsthe general principle of law is well settled that one of several wrongdoers cannot recover against another wrongdoer, although he may have been compelled to pay all the damages for the wrong done
In re Polemis…so long as the damage is in fact directly traceable to the negligent act, and not due to the operation of independent causes having no connection with the negligent act, except that they could not avoid its result
Mitchell v. Rochester Parkwaywe think the most reliable and better considered cases, as well as public policy, fully justify us in holding that the plaintiff cannot recover for injuries occasioned by right, as there is no immediate personal injury
Barker v. Lullif the jury finds that the risk of danger inherent in the challenged design outweighs the benefits of such design…
Brown v. Collins“Traffic on the highways, whether by land or sea …. or have their property adjacent to it . . .”
Brown v. Collins“Imposition of strict liability on all un-natural uses . . . impose penalty . . . throw serious obstacle in progress . . .”
Holmes“the law did not begin with a theory, it has never worked one out”, “the life of the law has not been logic, it has been experience”, “all that can be done is to point out a tendency and to justify it”
Holmes“discussion of legislative principle (the policy of the law) have been darkened by the limits of trespass on case”,
Holmes“natural and unavoidable these days that judges should base their judgment on broad considerations of policy to which the traditions of the bench would hardly have tolerated a reference 50 years ago”
Holmes“The business of the law of torts is to fix the dividing line between. . .”
Holmes“A man acts his peril”
Holmes“It is urged that the law cannot be less careful of person’s than property
Holmes“Strong grounds for thinking common law has never known such a rule . . . ”
Holmes“If SL is to be maintained at all it must be maintained through out”
Holmes“Loss for action must lie where it falls . . .”
Holmes“State’s cumbersome and expensive machinery ought not to be set in motion unless some benefit derives . . .”
Holmes“State intervention is an evil where it cannot be shown to be a good”
Bolton v. Stone“Something which a reasonable man would blame as falling beneath the standard of conduct set for himself . . .”
Holmes “a man born hasty and awkward, clumsy, accident prone”
Roberts v. Ring“only a reason why D should perhaps refrain from driving at all on a crowded street.”
Andrews v. United“all that human care, vigilance, and foresight reasonably can do under all the circumstances”
Andrews v. United“Common carriers owe passengers utmost care and vigilance of a very cautious person
T.J. Hooper“A whole calling may have unduly lagged…”
T.J. Hooper“In most cases reasonable prudence is in fact common prudence…”
Martin v. Herzog“life or limb”
Holmesfeatureless generality
Walston v. Lambertson“The sea itself contains many hazards”
Ybarra“We merely hold that where a P receives unusual injuries while unconscious & in course of medical treatment, all those Ds who have control over his body or the instrumentalities which might have caused injuries may properly be called upon to meet the inference of negligence by giving an explanation of their conduct”
Fuller“Last lingering gaze of the soft mild eyes of this docile animal…”
Murphy v. Steeplechase“the very hazard invited . . . .. obvious and necessary . . . the timorous can stay at home”
Thomas Atkins“Best use that can be made on authorities of proximate cause …. which judicious men upon careful consideration have adjudge to be on one side or the other.”
Restatement“leads reasonable man to regard it as a cause, in which there always lurks the idea of responsibility”
WagnerDanger invites rescue.
In re Polemis“So long as the damage is in fact directly traceable to the negligent act and not due to…independent causes…”
Palsgrafin the air
Palsgrafhowever novel or extraordinary
Marshall v. Nugent“The disturbed waters had become placid and normal again”
9/11 Case“The precise manner of the harm does not need to be foreseeable”
Ames“One who fails to interfere to save another from impending death or great bodily harm, when he might do so with little or no consequence to himself, and the death or great bodily harm follows as a consequence of his inaction, shall be punished criminally and shall make compensation to the party injured or to his widow and children in case of death.”
Robert Addie“there is no 1/2 way house, no no-man’s land between adjacent categories.”
Escola v. Coca Cola“It is in the public interest to discourage the marketing of products that … menace to the public.”
Micallef“Manufacturer has duty to design the products so as to avoid unreasonable risk of harm to anyone likely to be exposed to the danger when product is put to its intended use or unintended by foreseeable use”

Recent badges