Martin v. Herzog Case Brief Summary | Law Case Explained скачать в хорошем качестве

Martin v. Herzog Case Brief Summary | Law Case Explained

Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 16,300 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 223 casebooks ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-o... Martin v. Herzog | 126 N.E. 814 (1920) People violate the law every day. Usually, these indiscretions are only minor. Highway drivers might exceed posted speed limits. Drivers may turn where it’s not allowed. Pedestrians often jaywalk. These violations usually go unnoticed, and rarely result in more than a ticket. But if a serious accident results, people soon discover that their minor transgressions can have adverse legal consequences. So why does a minor violation have such major implications? In the 1920 case of Martin versus Herzog, Justice Benjamin Cardozo answered that question while serving on the Court of Appeals of New York. One dark night in 1915, William Martin, accompanied by his wife Elizabeth, was driving a horse-drawn buggy on a New York road. Even though New York law required horse-drawn carriages driving at night to have headlights, the Martins’ buggy didn’t have them. In a car coming from the opposite direction, Samuel Herzog crossed into the wrong lane, and collided with Martin’s buggy. The accident killed William Martin. Martin’s estate sued Herzog for wrongful death, alleging that Herzog’s car negligently crossed into the Martins’ lane before hitting them. Herzog denied liability, and also argued that Martin was contributorily negligent for not having the legally required headlights on his buggy. The trial judge instructed the jury that in deciding whether Martin was contributorily negligent, it could, if it chose, consider the fact that Martin’s buggy didn’t have headlights. But the jury wasn’t required to consider the lack of headlights. The jury found that Herzog’s negligence caused the accident, and also found that Martin wasn’t contributorily negligent. Herzog appealed to the appellate division, which reversed the trial court. The Court of Appeals of New York, the state’s highest court, then accepted the case. Want more details on this case? Get the rule of law, issues, holding and reasonings, and more case facts here: https://www.quimbee.com/cases/martin-... The Quimbee App features over 16,300 case briefs keyed to 223 casebooks. Try it free for 7 days! ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-o... Have Questions about this Case? Submit your questions and get answers from a real attorney here: https://www.quimbee.com/cases/martin-... Did we just become best friends? Stay connected to Quimbee here: Subscribe to our YouTube Channel ► https://www.youtube.com/subscription_... Quimbee Case Brief App ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-o... Facebook ►   / quimbeedotcom   Twitter ►   / quimbeedotcom   #casebriefs #lawcases #casesummaries