Case Brief 5,6,7 - Huan Long (201005051) Case Brief 5:...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Huan Long (201005051) Case Brief 5: Eckert v. Long Island R. Co. Facts: On the 26 th of November, 1867, a three- or four-year old child was sitting or standing upon a track of the defendants road as the train was approaching, was liable to be run over, if not removed. Henry Eckert, the plaintiff’s intestate, seeing the danger of the child, ran to it and saved him. However, when he tried to across the track himself, he was struck, thrown down, and received injuries and died the same night. Rules of Law: ALLEN and FOLGER, JJ., contra; Gould v. Oliver, 2 Scotts. N. R., 257; Ilott v. Wilkes, 3 B. & Ald., 311; Slagan v. Slingerland, 2 Caines, 219; Per MARVIN, J., in Corwin v. N. Y. and E. R. R. Co., 3 Ker., 42; per COWEN, J., in Hatfield v. Roper, 21 W. R., 620; Per BEARDSLEY, J., Tonawanda R. R. Co., v. Munger, 5 Denio, 255; Evansville R. R. Co. v. Hyatt (17 Ind., 102). Issues: 1. Is the action of plaintiff’s intestate negligent? 2. Should the deceased be liable for his injury? Holdings: 1. No. According to the ALLEN and FOLGER, JJ., contra, a person voluntarily placing himself, for the protection of property merely, in a position of danger, is negligent; however, when the exposure is for the purpose of saving life, it is not wrongful, and therefore not negligent unless such as to be regarded either rash or reckless. 2. Yes. Under the maxim volenti non fit injuria, no one can maintain an action for a wrong, when he consents or contributes to the act which occasions his loss. Rationale: 1. The deceased’s action was aimed to save the child’s life. Negligence implies some act of commission or omission wrongful in itself. Under the circumstances in which the deceased was placed, it was not wrongful in him to make every effort in his power to rescue the child, compatible with a reasonable regard for his own safety. It was his duty to exercise his judgment as to whether he could probably save the child without serious injury to himself. If, from the appearances, he believed that he could, it was not negligence to make an attempt so to do, although believing that possibly he might
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 11/22/2011 for the course BUS 306 taught by Professor Anhnamsung during the Spring '11 term at Solano Community College.

Page1 / 5

Case Brief 5,6,7 - Huan Long (201005051) Case Brief 5:...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online