 | Law reports, digests, etc - 1905 - 1124 pages
...the same circumstances" — the test of liability was right, and then, apparently casually, said that "what ought to be done is fixed by a standard of reasonable prudence, whether it usually is complied with or not," and cited Wabash R. Co. v. McDaniels. With this single exception,... | |
 | Law reports, digests, etc - 1908 - 1156 pages
...Co. v. Behymer, 189 US 468, at page 470, 23 Sup. Ct. 622, at page 623 (47 L. Ed. 905) the court says: "What usually is done may be evidence of what ought...fixed by a standard of reasonable prudence, whether It usually le compiled with or not." In Maynard v. Buck. 100 Mass. 47, 48, the court says: "What bad been... | |
 | Law reports, digests, etc - 1917 - 1312 pages
...circumstances. This exception needs no discussion. The charge embodied one of the commonplaces of the law. What usually is done may be evidence of what ought...fixed by a standard of reasonable prudence, whether it usually is complied with or not." We think the view of this question which we are endeavoring to express... | |
 | Appellate courts - 1905 - 856 pages
...the same circumstances" — the test of liability was right, and then, apparently casually, said that "what ought to be done is fixed by a standard of reasonable prudence, whether it usually is complied with or not," and cited Wabash R. Co. v. McDaniels. With this single exception,... | |
 | New York (State). Supreme Court. Appellate Division - Law reports, digests, etc - 1908 - 1072 pages
...they could have done otherwise. In Texas & Pacific E. Co. v. Behymer (189 US 468) the court says : " "What usually is done may be evidence of what ought...fixed by a standard of reasonable prudence, whether it usually is complied with or not." Of such reasonable prudence the defendant was able to furnish no... | |
 | Railroad law - 1904 - 1014 pages
...no discussion. The charge embodied one of commonplaces of the law. What usually is done may be dence of what ought to be done, but what ought to be done ixed by a standard of reasonable prudence, whether it usu.' is complied with or not. Wabash R. Co.... | |
 | Railroad law - 1906 - 992 pages
...1 Wash. 446, 25 Pac 335. Wisconsin. — Douglas v. Chicago, etc., Ry. Co., 100 Wis. 405, 76 KW 356. What usually is done may be evidence of what ought...be done, but what ought to be done is fixed by a. reasonable prudence, whether it is usually complied with or not. So held in Wabash Ry. Co. v. McDaniels,... | |
 | Law reports, digests, etc - 1906 - 1298 pages
...the same circumstances" — the test of liability was right, and then, apparently casually, said that "what ought to be done is fixed by a standard of reasonable prudence, whether it usually is complied with or not;" and cited Wabash R. Co. v. McDaniels. With this single exception,... | |
 | Law reports, digests, etc - 1906 - 1298 pages
...Eddy, 115 Mo. 283, 21 SW 742. Mr. ML Clardy also for appellant. Messrs. Silver & Brown, for respondent: What ought to be done is fixed by a standard of reasonable prudence. Texas & PR Co. v. Behymer, 189 US 468, 47 L. ed. 905, 23 Sup. Ct. Rep. 622; Dougherty v. Kansas City... | |
 | Law reports, digests, etc - 1908 - 1366 pages
...R. Co. v. McDaniels, 107 US 454, 27 L. ed. 605. 2 Sup. Ct. Rep. 932. As said by Mr. Justice Holmes: "What usually is done may be evidence of what ought...fixed by a standard of reasonable prudence, whether ¡t usually is complied with or not." Texas & PR Co. v. Behymer, 189 US 470, 47 L. ed. 905. 23 Sup.... | |
| |
What usually is done may be evidence of what ought to be done, but what ought to be done is fixed by a standard of reasonable prudence, whether it usually is complied with or not. 
