(DOWNLOAD) "Autio v. Miller" by Supreme Court of Montana # Book PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: Autio v. Miller
- Author : Supreme Court of Montana
- Release Date : January 15, 1932
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 68 KB
Description
Personal Injuries ? Automobile Accident on City Street ? Action for Death of Child ? Complaint ? Sufficiency ? Duty of Automobilist ? Contributory Negligence ? Jury Question ? Evidence ? Expectancy of Life ? Testimony Based on Carlisle Mortality Table Admissible ? What not Excessive Verdict. Personal Injuries ? Automobiles ? Accident in City Street ? Complaint ? Sufficiency. 1. Complaint in an action to recover damages for the death of an eight year old child killed on a city street by an automobilist, charging failure to keep a proper lookout; driving at the excessive - Page 151 speed of from 35 to 40 miles an hour; failure to have the automobile under proper control, and negligence in failing to run the automobile in a reasonable and proper manner, taking into account various matters, so as not to endanger the life and limbs of persons entitled to use the highway, etc., held to state a cause of action. Same ? Pleading ? What not a Conclusion of Law. 2. An allegation in a complaint of the above nature, that defendant failed and neglected to keep any lookout in driving his automobile held not a mere conclusion of law but the terse allegation of an ultimate fact. Same ? Occurrence of Accident not Evidence of Negligence or Contributory Negligence. 3. In a personal injury case, the bare fact that an accident occurred is not evidence of itself either that the defendant was negligent or that the injured person was guilty of contributory negligence; nor may an automobilist be held liable in damages unless the injury or death complained of was caused by his fault. Same ? Appeal ? Presumption is That Judgment Appealed from is Correct. 4. In analyzing the evidence in a personal injury action, the supreme court keeps in view the presumption that the judgment appealed from is correct. Same ? Where Excessive Speed of Automobile Alleged as Element of Negligence, Among Others, Proof Must Show That It was Proximate Cause of Injury to Hold Defendant Liable on That Account. 5. Where plaintiff among other elements of negligence in an automobile accident case includes that of excessive speed, liability of defendant for such negligence depends on proof that the excessive speed was the proximate cause of the injury. Same ? Duty of Automobilist in Driving on City Street ? Presumption. 6. The driver of an automobile must not only look straight ahead but laterally ahead as well, and he is presumed to see that which he could see by looking; the duty to keep a lookout includes the duty to see what is in plain sight, and in passing another car he must exercise vigilance commensurate with the surrounding conditions. Same. 7. While a motorist on a city street, seeing a person in a place of safety, is not called upon to presume that the person will rush into a place of danger, nor bound to anticipate that a child will suddenly dart from the side of the street in front of his car, he must nevertheless be vigilant at the risk of being held negligent by the jury. Same ? Whether Eight Year Old Boy in Stepping in Front of Moving Automobile was Guilty of Contributory Negligence, or Excusable Under the Emergency Rule, Held Question for Jury. 8. Whether a boy eight years of age was or was not guilty of contributory negligence in stepping from an apparent place of safety in a city street, in front of an approaching automobile, or excusable under the emergency rule under which one who acts in a sudden emergency according to his best judgment, or for want of time to form a judgment, omits to act in the most judicious manner, is not chargeable with negligence, such act or omission being a
 "Autio v. Miller" by Supreme Court of Montana # Book PDF Kindle ePub Free){kind=link}