A child may lawfully upon the sidewalk for pleasure only, that say, for play, and the city owes the same duty have the sidewalk in a reasonably safe state repair in respect that does In respect those who are the sidewalk passing or returning from their places business or abode.
Help with outlining a research paper
It may true that the child will less careful in its mode using the sidewalk while playing than the business man will while traveling or from his place business or abode but this belongs the domain fact, and not that law.
It may in most cases, not inevitably In all cases. It for the jury, not the court, say what, in a given case, buy an essay was the conduct the parties. Our attention called an expression used in City Chicago, where said For borne in mind that It not the duty the city Chicago make its streets a safe playground for children.
That not the purpose for which streets are designed.
This expression does not occur in the statement a legal principle, nor in the argument a legal proposition, but occurs in an argument upon a question fact purely, namely, whether, in that case, the intestate was guilty that degree contributive negligence which precluded a recovery. At that cheap custom term paper time this court reviewed questions fact as well as law, and often these questions were intermingled in the discussion that required some effort and care distinguish twe them. It was, case referred assumed as a matter fact that children, in playing, will more careless than persons who are simply passing along. And the only legal proposition one that implied in the argument and that that the measure duty the city in regard its streets, limited the necessity the ordinary modes traveling or passing along the streets. If they were not kept this requirement, and children in playing did not subject them greater burdens, or essentially different uses, certainly was not contemplated that the fact the children being at play should bar a recovery for Injaries resulting from the condition the streets. had every opportunity seeing and knowing where she was going and Controlling her movements.
If the lower step was inconveniently or dangerously high for her in the condition she was, she and her husband bad as good an opportunity as any one else knowing the fact.
If they had even a suspicion that was in the least degree unsafe for her take the last step, there was no urgent necessity for her The train reached its destination, and there was no occasion for baste in leaving the car. If they had any apprehension danger, or even Inconvenience in descending from the lower step, there was nothing prompt them But in another case where the evidence was that the plaintiff was a passenger one defendant's stages, and as she got out the horses started and she was thrown down and injured thereby, It was held that the facts showed prima facie, eithei that the horses were unsuitable for the business or that the driver was incompetent.
Websites to buy research papers
College research paper writers
Boberts Johnson, And where a passenger a steamboat was Injured the fall a bale goods the act appellant's servant, was held that there was prima facie evidence negligence, and that the appellee must the necessary work.
And therefore, in the absence any evidence show that the defendants rebut that presnmption.
As examples the latter class cases, those not resting in contract, Defendant company was engaged in unloading iron ore from a vessel means a crane which was attached a bucket. While engaged the bucket tipped and threw Its contents upon a seaman lawfully working npon the deck the vessel, Cnmmlngs The. National Furnace The court said The accident itself was such a character as raise a presumption negligence either in the character the machinery used or in the care with which was handled and as the jury found the fault wafi not in the machinery, follows online essay proofreader that must have been in the handling, otherwise there no rational cause shown for its happening. The rule that an accident may such a nature as raise a presnmption negligence fully sustained the following authorities cited the learned counsel for the respondent in their brief help write cheap essay writing service online my essay the court lays down the following rule In an action for personal injury caused the alleged negligence the defendant, the plaintiff must adduce reasonable evidence negligence warrant essay help chat the judge in leaving the knew the insecurity the roof, was held that the mere fact a plank and roll zinc falling case the jnry bnt when the thing iown under the management the defendant or his servants and the accident snch as in the ordinary course things does not happen, if those who liave the management use proper care, affords reasonable evidence in the absence explanation the defendant that the accident arose from want care. The rule laid down in this case fully sustained the cases above cited and was hire a ghostwriter cited and approved this court in the case. The evidence in this case given the defendant makes a stronger case for the plaintiff than in the cases cited. It shows conclusively that the accident would not have happened if those handling the bucket had used prdinary care in seeing that the bail was securely fastened, before the bncket was hoisted, and there had been no carelessness the need help writing a dissertation part the man who handled the rope attached the spring. The affirmative.evidence the part the defendant showing care in these respects not the most substantial kind.