Watts v. Montgomery Traction Co.
Supreme Court of Alabama
Appeal from Montgomery Circuit Court. Heard before Hon. W. W. Pearson. Action by Edw. S. Watts against tbe Montgomery Traction Company. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff appeals. Tbe action was for damages to an automobile, caused by tbe automobile being struck by a car and demolished; the automobile at the time being run ahead of the ■car and in the same direction as the car.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Montgomery Circuit Court. Heard before Hon. W. W. Pearson. Action by Edw. S. Watts against tbe Montgomery Traction Company. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff appeals. Tbe action was for damages to an automobile, caused by tbe automobile being struck by a car and demolished; the automobile at the time being run ahead of the ■car and in the same direction as the car. Plea 8 is as follows: “Defendant says: That the accident occurred on one of the streets of the city of Montgomery, within the limits of said city. That at said time, and for a long time, there had been an ordinance…
1Opinion of the CourtAnderson, J.
The decisions as to the legal effect of violating a statute or ordinance are not harmonious. In some cases it is held that such violation is not negligence per se, but that it is competent evidence of negligence, and may be sufficient to justify a jury in finding negligence in fact. — 29 Cyc. 437, and cases cited in note. HoAvever, it is settled in Alabama, and we think it is the Aveight of authority, that a violation of a statute or an ordinance is negligence per se, and a person proximately injured thereby may recover for such injuries against the violator of the law. — Kansas City R. R. v.…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Newcomb v. Boston Protective DepartmentMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1888
- Parker v. BarnardMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1883
- Weller v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1894
- Broschart v. TuttleSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1890
- Rosse v. St. Paul & Duluth Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1897
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by61 opinions
- O'Donnell v. Elgin, Joliet & Eastern Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1949
- Schell v. DuBoisOhio Supreme Court · 1916
- Morgan Hill Paving Co. v. FonvilleSupreme Court of Alabama · 1928
- Huckabee v. GraceCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1934
- Cooper v. AgeeSupreme Court of Alabama · 1930
56 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.