Harlow v. Propes

Citations

• 102 Kan. 424
• 170 P. 983
• 1918 Kan. LEXIS 57

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1. Negligence — •Substitution of Gasoline for Coal Oil — Fire in 'Cook Stove — Evidence. Whether or not the plaintiff was negligent in using what he supposed to be coal oil in starting a fire in his cook stove, was a question of fact properly submitted to the jury.</p> <p>2. Same — Agency of Oil Company — Sufficiently Established. The agency of the seller of the fluid from the wagon was sufficiently established by the evidence of the defendant company’s manager.</p> <p>3. Same — Proximate Cause of Injury. The substitution of gasoline for coal oil held to have been the proximate cause of the injury complained of.</p> <p>4. Same — Motion for New Trial — Properly Denied. The affidavit filed by the defendant Propes, even if available by the defendant company, was not sufficient to require the granting of a new trial, under the rule that such evidence must be such as would likely work a different result from that already reached by the jury.</p>