ONTARIO SEWING MACHINE COMPANY, LTD. v. Smith

How courts have described this case

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

• stating the original wrongdoer is responsible for consequences resulting from an intervening act when the subsequent injury was probable
• “[F]or an intervening act of a third party to become the sole proximate cause of a plaintiffs injuries, the intervening act must not have been ‘foreseeable by defendant....’”
• “[I]t is axiomatic that questions regarding proximate cause are undeniably a jury question and may only be determined by the courts in plain and undisputed cases.” (internal quotation marks omitted)
• “[I]t is axiomatic that questions regarding proximate cause are ‘undeniably a jury question’ and may only be determined by the courts ‘in plain and undisputed cases.’” (quoting Atlanta Obstetrics & Gynecology Grp. v. Coleman, 398 S.E.2d 16 (Ga. 1990))
• “[I]t is axiomatic that questions regarding proximate cause are ‘undeniably a jury question’ and may only be determined by the courts ‘in plain and undisputed cases.’” (quoting Atlanta Obstetrics & Gynecology Grp. v. Coleman, 398 S.E.2d 16 (Ga. 1990))
• discussing the proximate-cause element of a design-defect claim

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).