Legal Opinion · Dissent

Levin v. City of Omaha

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided March 30, 1918No. 19789Published

Appeal from the district court for Douglas county: William A. Redick, Judge.

1Dissent

Cornish,- J.,

dissenting.

Law and common sense generally do and should agree. I do not say the opinion is not common sense, but I do believe that hundreds of business men, farmers, shop-owners, factory-owners, and others will be surprised to learn that their foremen (mere servants), without power to hire men, can engage a stranger at work operating another stranger’s automobile through the congested streets of a city, and do it in the master’s name so as to make him responsible for the negligence of the stranger so engaged. Operating an automobile is a hazardous occupation and is so recognized…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Geiss v. Twin City Taxicab Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1913
  2. Slothower v. ClarkMissouri Court of Appeals · 1915
  3. James v. MuehlebachMissouri Court of Appeals · 1889
  4. Mangan v. FoleyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1888
  5. Home Fire Insurance v. GarbaczNebraska Supreme Court · 1896

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API