Hawkins v Cooper
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 16 February 1838 |
| Date | 16 February 1838 |
| Court | High Court |
English Reports Citation: 173 E.R. 580
IN THE COURTS OF KING'S BENCH, COMMON PLEAS AND EXCHEQUER
[473] Adjourned Sittings in London, after Hilary Term, 1838, before Lord Chief Justice Tindal Feb 16th, 1838 hawkins v. cooper. (In an action for an injury to a person crossing a public highway, by driving against him and knocking him down, the jury must be satisfied that the injury was attributable to the negligence of the driver, and to that alone, before they can find a verdict for the plaintiff; and if they think that it was occasioned in any degree by tie improper conduct of the plaintiff in crossing the road in an incautious and imprudent manner, they must find their verdict for the defendant) The declaration stated that the defendant, on the 29th of April, 1837, was possessed of a certain cart and of a certain horse then drawing the same, and which said cart and horse were then under the care and government of a servant of his, who was driving them along a certain public and common highway, which said highway the plaintiff was then crossing, and passing over and along, and that the defendant by his said servant so carelessly, negligently, and improperly drove, governed, and directed the said cart and horse, that by and through the negligence, g SAB, ft P. t74. LANPHIER V. PHIPOS 581 cajelessaess, and improper conduct of the defendant by his said servant, the said caft and herae ran and struck with great force and violence upon, against, and over the plaintiff, and thereby cast and threw her on the ground, and went over her, and greatly cut, lacerated, hurt, bruised, and wounded her, &c. Plea-Not guilty. The plaintiff was a widow,, and about five m the afternoon of the 29th of April, 1837, was crossing the Westminster Road near the Marsh Gate, when a cart and horse, driven by a lad who was in the service of the defendant, a butcher, residing very near, ran against her, and knocked her down, and very seriously injured her. Ome witness for the plaintiff stated that the cart was on the wrong side of the road, and going at the rate of twelve miles an hour at the time of the injury ; and it was proved that the horse was guided, not by means of a bit in the mouth, but by an iron chain across the outside of the nose, which operated instead of a bit Another of the plaintiff's witnesses, a person named Roffey, said [474] that there was an omnibus on the crown of the road, swerving so that the defendant's lad must have taken a very...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Doyle v Kinahan
...CompanyENR 3 C. B. 1. Smith v. Dodson 3 M. & Gr. 59. Thorogood v. BryanENR 8 C. B. 115, see pp. 117, 130. Hawkins v. CooperENR 8 Car. & P. 473. Vennall v. GarnerENR 1 C. & M. 21. Tuff v. WarmanENRENR 2 C. B. N. S. 760; 5 C. B. N. S. 573. Flower v. AdamENR 2 Taunt. 316, per Lawrence, J. Dowe......
-
The Trustees of The Charities of Joseph Evans v The Governor and Company of The Bank of Ireland
...& M. 130. The Queen v. Wilson 1 Den. Cr. Cas. 284. Rex v. Hort 1 Mod, Cr. Cas. 486. Flower v. AdamENR 2 Taunt. 314. Hawkins v. CooperENR 8 Car. & P. 473. Woolf v. BeardENR 8 C. & P. 373. Luxfrd v. LargeENR 5 Car. & P. 421. Buttrfield v. ForresterENR 11 East, 60. Russel v. langstaffeENR 2 Do......
-
Dowell and Others against The General Steam Navigation Company
...with Pfachoell v. Wilson (5 C. & P. 375), Fennall v. Garner (1 Cr. & M. 21), Luxford v. Large (5 C. & P. 421) and Hawkins v. Cooper (8 C. & P. 473). Lord Tenterden used always to tell the jury that, in order to find a verdict for the plaintiff, they must be of opinion that the accident was ......
-
Bond v western
...plaintiff in crossing the road in an incautious and imprudent manner, they must find their verdict for the defendant (Hawkins v Cooper, 8 Car & P 473, Tmdal) But the rule afterwards became (Woolfe v Beard, ibid 373, Coleridge, J ) altered to this, that the question is whether, in such cases......