Legal Opinion · Dissent

Smith v. Gould

West Virginia Supreme Court

Decided June 9, 1931No. 6942Published

1DissentHatcher, Judge

I have no quarrel with the majority of the Court merely for disagreeing with my personal expression in the last paragraph of the opinion in Keller v. Ry. Co., 109 W. Va. 522, 528, 156 S. E. 50, 52-3. I regret the disagreement, of course, but I find companionship with other jurists, such as Cardozo, who said in 1930: “The doctrine of the last clear chance, however, is never wakened into action unless and until there is brought home to the defendant to be charged with liability, a knowledge that another is in a state of present peril.” Woloszynowski v. Ry. Co., (N. Y.) 172 N. E. 471-2. See also…

2Cases cited49 opinions

  1. Gibbard v. CursanMichigan Supreme Court · 1923
  2. Northern Central Railway Co. v. State ex rel. PriceCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1868
  3. Mosso v. E. H. Stanton Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1913
  4. Indianapolis Traction & Terminal Co v. CrolyIndiana Supreme Court · 1911
  5. Nehring v. Connecticut Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1912

44 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API