Harrison v. Pullens

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• upholding the jury’s verdict, including its finding - 27 - that the plaintiffs were contributorily negligent, despite the evidence that the defendant pleaded guilty to a traffic violation
• “Proof of violation of traffic regulatory statutes, alone, is not sufficient to establish negligence sufficient to sustain liability. In must be proved that the statutory violation proximately caused the injury complained of.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).