NEGLIGENCE - CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE - STANDARD OF CARE - OBJECTIVE OR SUBJECTIVE?

Authors

John H. Pickering, University of Michigan Law School

Abstract

While anchoring a guy wire for a hay carrier on his farm, plaintiff suffered injuries caused by contact between the guy wire and a high tension line owned by defendant. After an answer denying negligence and setting up the defense of contributory negligence on the part of plaintiff, defendant had a directed verdict. Held, that the alleged contributory negligence of plaintiff was a question of fact for the jury which was to be guided by the standard of care of the ordinary, careful, prudent man in the situation of the injured party in all respects, the court saying, "We think it well settled that, in determining whether a plaintiff in a particular case was guilty of contributory negligence, the knowledge and experience of such plaintiff and the appreciation which he should have had of the danger must be taken into consideration." Aller v. Iowa Electric Light & Power Co., (Iowa, 1938) 283 N. W. 81 at 85.

Recommended Citation

John H. Pickering, NEGLIGENCE - CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE - STANDARD OF CARE - OBJECTIVE OR SUBJECTIVE?, 38 Mich. L. Rev. 263 (1939).
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol38/iss2/25