Ferraro v. Taylor

I am in full accord with that part of the opinion Avhich relates to the misconduct of plaintiffs’ counsel. It is obvious that by no stretch of the imagiiiation can such remarks be construed as anything other than prejudicial.

Nor do I find any difficulty in going with the majority in that part of the opinion wherein it is said that “where the intervening cause is set in operation by the original negligence, such negligence is still the proximate cause.” But I do have difficulty, in fact find myself wholly unable, to agree that upon the facts in the instant case that rule is applicable. From…