Kruschka v. Konvitz

Pee Cubiam.

The infant plaintiff was grievously injured by reason of a collision between the car his father was driving and that driven by the defendant. The action was tried before the court and a jury.

The court, at no time, defined negligence, proximate cause, contributory negligence, or stated the true rule of damages applicable to an action of this kind. Such legal principles were obviously an essential part of the court’s charge, if the jury were to' find the facts within the bounds of the controlling legal principles. Counsel was certainly entitled to the expectation that the court would…