...plaintiff herself so far contributed to the misfortune, by her own negligence or want of ordinary and common care and caution, that, but for such negligence or want of ordinary care and caution on her part, the misfortune would not have happened; that, in the first case, the plaintiff...

...or that the injury was in no degree attributable to want of proper care on his part. If the deceased so far contributed to the misfortune by his own negligence or want of care and caution, that but for such negligence or want of ordinary care and caution on his part, the...

...us that the proper question for the jury in this case, as indeed of all others of a like kind, is, whether the damage was occasioned entirely by the...misfortune by his own negligence or want of ordinary and common care and caution, that but for such negligence or want of ordinary care and caution on his...

...Legal Maxims (a). The consideration for the jury is, " Whether the damage was occasioned entirely by negligence or improper conduct of the defendant, or...misfortune by his own negligence, or want of ordinary and common care and caution, that but for such negligence, or want of ordinary care and caution on...

...that the- proper question for the jury in this case, and indeed in all others of the like kind, is, whether the damage was occasioned entirely by the...misfortune by his own negligence or want of ordinary and common care and caution, that, but for such negligence or want of ordinary r care and caution on...

...Contributorg Negligence. — The settled form of question for the jury in the common law courts in England is, whether the damage was occasioned entirely by the...misfortune by his own negligence or want of ordinary and common care and caution, that, but for such negligence or want of ordinary care and caution on...

...is not disputed. When the defense is contributor}' negligence, tho proper question for the jury is, whether the damage was occasioned entirely by the...that but for such negligence or want of ordinary care and caution on his part, the misfortune would not have occurred. In the first case the plaintiff would...

...be that where the doctrine referred to is involved, the question for the jury will be as follows — "Whether the damage was occasioned entirely by the...to the misfortune by his own negligence or want of 1 Parnaby c. Lancaster Canal Co., 11 A. & E. 223, 243 (39 ECLR) ; Birkett v. Whitehaven Junction RC,...

...action could not be maintained.1 The question for the jury, it is said by a learned English judge, is " whether the damage was occasioned entirely by the...or whether the plaintiff himself so far contributed t Flower v. Adam, 3 Taunt. 314. See Schloss v. Heriot, 14 CBNS 59; Burrows r. March Gas, &c. Co. LR...

...above case of Tuff v. Warman, the court laid down the following as the proper question for the jury: " Whether the damage was occasioned entirely by the...of the defendant, or whether the plaintiff himself во far contributed to the misfortune by his own negligence or want of ordinary and common care and...