Free Essays, Term Papers, Research Papers at Anti Essays

1. Case name:
(P-Respondent) Palsgraf v. (D-Petitioner) Long Island R.R. Co., 162 N.E. 99, 248 N.Y. 339 (1928)

2. Facts:
Plaintiff was standing on a platform of defendant’s railroad, while a man, carrying a package, was trying to catch the train which was already moving. The package containing fireworks but covered by a news-paper, so it didn’t suggest any notice of its contents and potential peril to persons around from appearance. While a guard was pushing the man from behind to help him aboard, the packaged fell upon the rails and exploded, resulting in injuries on the plaintiff at the other end of the platform though the man was not injured in his person. The plaintiff sued in her own right for a wrong personal to herself.

3. Issue:
Is there any civil liability because the defendant pushed a man to help him catch a moving train, causing an injury the plaintiff standing far away, where the defendant’s conduct caused the man’s package, without any notice of its contents from appearance, fall onto the rails and explore?

4. Holding:
No. The judgment of the Appellate Division and that of the Trial Term should be reversed.

5. Court’s Reasoning:
a, An act can’t been regarded as a tort to a plaintiff if it was happening to a wrong with reference to some one else and there was no apparent hazard to the eye of ordinary vigilance.
b, The duty to be obeyed is defined by the risk reasonably to be perceived.
c, Negligence is neither a tort if indeed it is understandable at all, nor a basis of civil liability to the mediaeval law.
d, There is no occasion to consider what damage might be recovered if there’s no tort to be redressed.