Laidlaw v. Sage - 158 N.Y. 73; 52 N.E. 679

Rule:

The breach of duty upon which an action is brought must be not only the cause but the proximate cause of the damage to the plaintiff. The proximate cause of an event must be understood to be that which, in a natural and continuous sequence, unbroken by any new cause, produces that event, and without which that event would not have occurred. 

Facts:

Appellant businessman sought review of a decision of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department (New York) in favor of respondent individual in an action for personal injury. The businessman and individual were injured in an explosion. The individual claimed the businessman used the individual as a shield and thus his injures were greater than they would have been. The lower court decided in favor of the individual.

Issue:

Did the lower court err in stressing only a part of the defendant's testimony?

Answer:

Yes.

Conclusion:

The court reversed the lower court, noting that the court had jurisdiction to hear the appeal. The court held that the law presumed that an act or omission done or neglected under the influence of pressing danger was done or neglected involuntarily. The court also held that the lower court erred in stressing only a part of the businessman's testimony because where there was an introduction of a part of a conversation or admission by a party, the remainder which tended to qualify or explain the portion relied upon should be considered as a part of it. The court further held that the individual had not established that any action by the businessman was the proximate cause of his injuries and there was not enough evidence against the businessman to send the issue of his liability to the jury.

The court reversed the decision of the lower court and remanded to the trial court for a new trial.