...be in this issue, if some of the significant intermediate facts be not noticed. "The true rule is, that the injury must be the natural and probable consequence...and ought to have been foreseen by the wrong-doer, and likely to flow from his act:" Township ». Watson, 3 Atlantic R., 869. To the same effect is Behling...

...The rule on this subject is as follows : " In determining what is proximate cause, the true rule is that the injury must be the natural and probable consequence...circumstances of the case, might and ought to have been seen by the wrong-doer as likely to flow from his act." (Railway Co. v. Taylor, 104 Pa. St. 306 ; Township...

...The rule on this subject is as follows: " In determining what is the proximate cause the true rule is that the injury must be the natural and probable consequence of the negligence; such a consequence aa under the surrounding circumstances of the case might and ought to have been seen by the wrongdoer...

...attaches; in the latter it does not: Haoerly v. State Line etc. RR Co., 135 Pa. St. 50; 20 Am. St Rep. 848. The injury must be the natural and probable consequence of the negligence. The immediate, ami not the remote, cause of injury is to be considered, and this rule is not to be...

...by Paxson, J., in Hoag v. Lake Shore etc. RR Co., 85 Pa. St. 293, 27 Am. Rep. 653: "The injury moist be the natural and probable consequence of the negligence...and ought to have been foreseen by the wrongdoer." And, as is remarked by Black, CJ, while discussing the same doctrine in Pittsburg v. Grier, 22 Pa....

...Pa. 293, 27 Am. Rep. 653, I o these facts, the question on which the case turns is: Was the injury ' 'the natural and probable consequence of the negligence,...by the wrongdoer as likely to flow from his act?" As concerns the situation of plaintiff at tbe time of his injury, and the relation of that fact to...

...consequence of the defendant's acts (Ryan v. Railroad Co., 35 NY 210; Railroad Co. v. Reeves, 10 Wall. 176); such a consequence as, under the surrounding circumstances...foreseen by the wrongdoer as likely to flow from his act. The court, in Jex v. Straus, 122 NY 301, 25 NE 480, said: "The law requires that the injury must proceed...

...Is proximate, the true rule is that the injury must be the natural and probable consequence of f.he negligence ; such a consequence as under the surrounding...foreseen by the wrongdoer as likely to flow from his uct." But the facts here are entirely different from those supposed ; the freight yard of a common...

...determining what is proximate cause, the true rule is, that the injury must be the natural and porbable consequence of the negligence; such a consequence...surrounding circumstances of the case might and ought to be foreseen by the wrong-doer as likely to flow from his act: Hoag v. The Railroad Co., 85 Pa. 293;...

...St. 293, 27 Am. Rep. 653, to these facts, the question on which the case turns is: "Was the injury the natural and probable consequence of the negligence...consequence as, under the surrounding circumstances, might and ought to have been foreseen by the wrongdoer as likely to flow from his act?' As concerns...