Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The case came out of a traffic accident between the plaintiff and the defendant in which both of them had been found to have been driving negligently. The plaintiff (Li) had attempted to cross three lanes of oncoming traffic to enter a service station ; the defendant's (Yellow Cab Co.) driver was traveling at an excessive speed when he ran a ...
One of the earliest reported cases under this cause of action, the 1915 Mississippi case of Winn v. Haliday, [1] concerned the negligence of the father in entrusting a dangerous agency to a son known to be negligent, based on the allegation that the appellant knew his son to be given to 'joyriding'.
A dissenting opinion by John W. Hogan countered that the plaintiff's negligence was not a contributing cause of the accident because the defendant was driving on the wrong side of the road. The dissenting opinion sets out the jury's findings of fact, which were affirmed by the Appellate Division: (A) the defendant was driving his car on the ...
The parents of a Tesla driver, who was crushed to death in a horrifying accident, filed a lawsuit against the electric car manufacturer. Genesis Giovanni Mendoza-Martinez, 31, tragically lost his ...
A North Carolina woman sued Google for negligence Tuesday after her husband drove off a collapsed bridge and died while following directions from Google Maps. Alicia Paxson’s husband, Philip ...
The complaint accuses the company of improperly removing a speed limiter placed on the car, as well as releasing an unsafe product. Tesla Hit with Negligence Suit Following Fatal Car Crash in Fort ...
The jury awarded plaintiffs $127.8 million in damages, the largest ever in US product liability and personal injury cases. Grimshaw v. Ford Motor Company was one of the most widely publicized of the more than a hundred lawsuits brought against Ford in connection with rear-end accidents in the Pinto. [1]
Pound took no part in the consideration or decision of the case. Buick Motor Co. , 217 N.Y. 382, 111 N.E. 1050 (1916) is a famous New York Court of Appeals opinion by Judge Benjamin N. Cardozo that removed the requirement of privity of contract for duty in negligence actions.