Carlin v. Smith
Court of Appeals of Maryland
1Dissent
It seems to me that the testimony tracing the injury to a bump on a roller in the contrivance on which the plaintiff was riding hardly rises above speculation. But passing that phase of the case, I think that while confining liability, according to the well-settled rule, to a failure to exercise reasonable care under the circumstances before the defendant, the court in effect holds him liable without requiring any such failure to be shown. We have a case in which the defendant has been held liable in heavy damages for an injury which, so far as any evidence shows, never occurred before, and…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- City of Dallas v. MaxwellTexas Commission of Appeals · 1923
- Hubbell v. . City of YonkersNew York Court of Appeals · 1887
- Godfrey v. Connecticut Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1922
- Washington, Colesville & Ashton Turnpike Co. v. CaseCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1894
- Callis v. United Railways & Electric Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1916
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.