...were negligent in this respect, but to her fainting when she saw her two children going up in the car. "In determining what is proximate cause, the true rule Is that the Injury must be the natural aud probable consequence of the negligence ; such a consequence as, under the surrounding circumstances...

...to be deemed the proximate cause of an injury, nn'ess the injury was snch a consequence of the act as, under the surrounding circumstances of the case, might and ought to have been foreseen or anticipated by an ordinarily reasonable and prudent man, as reasonably likely to flow from the act....

...BATTLE said : "In determining whether an act of a defendant is the proximate cause of an injury the rule is that the injury must be the natural and probable consequence of the act — such a consequence, under the surrounding circumstances of the case, as might and ought to...

...353) and Railroad Co. v. Hope (80 Id. 373), laid down tho rule as to proximate cause as follows : " In determining what is proximate cause the true rule...case, might and ought to have been foreseen by the wroug-doer, as likely to now from his act. " Applying this rule to th.- facts of the present case,...

...consequence of the negligence of the defendants." " 3d. The rule for determining what a proximate cause is, that the injury must be the natural and probable consequence of the negligence, and that it might and ought to have been foreseen under the circumstances." "4th. Pennsylvania R. Co....

...574. 2 Thomps. Neg. 766. The rule as to proximate anil remote causes stated by Paxson, J., to be " that the injury must be the natural and probable consequence...circumstances of the case, might and ought to have benn foreseen by the wrong-doer as likely to flow from his act." Hoag ». Lake Shore & MSRR Co., 85...

...again put somewhat more tersely by the present chief justice in Hoag v. Railroad Co., as follows: " The injury must be the natural and probable consequence of the negligence, — such a consequence as * * * might and ought to have been foreseen by the wrong-doer as likely to flow from his act." The...

...Varnau were the natural and probable consequence of the negligence of the defendant, or its servants, such a consequence as, under the surrounding circumstances of the case, might and should have been foreseen by the servant as likely to flow from his carelessness, and there was no...

...instruction the plaintiff excepted. The Court further charged the jury: "To render the defendant liable, the injury must be the natural and probable consequence...of the negligence, such a consequence as, under the circumstances, might or ought to have been foreseen by the wrong-doer as likely to result from his...

...must end somewhere. There is a possibility of carrying an admittedly correct principle too far ... The true rule is that the injury must be the natural and probable consequence of the [defendant's] negligence — such a consequence, as, under the surrounding circumstances of the case,...