From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Davis v. Evers

United States District Court, W.D. Wisconsin
Jun 4, 2007
07-C-225-S (W.D. Wis. Jun. 4, 2007)
Download
PDF
Check
Treatment

Summary

In Evers v. Davis, 86 N.J.L. 196, this court said, "a defendant although he cannot be heard to say that it was not his duty to obey the statute, may show what he did in his effort to obey it, leaving it to the jury to say whether such effort was what a reasonably prudent person would have done in view of the statute."

Summary of this case from Henry v. Ehrlich Transfer Trucking Co., Inc.
See 3 Summaries

Opinion

07-C-225-S.

June 4, 2007

ORDER

JOHN SHABAZ, District Judge

Pursuant to Rule 41(a), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, plaintiff requests that the above entitled action be dismissed without prejudice. Plaintiff's complaint has not been served because he did not pay his initial partial filing fee. His request to dismiss the above entitle action will be granted.

ORDER

IT IS ORDERED that plaintiff's request to voluntarily dismiss the above entitled matter without prejudice is GRANTED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that judgment be entered DISMISSING plaintiff's complaint and all claims contained therein without prejudice.

Summaries of

Davis v. Evers

United States District Court, W.D. Wisconsin
Jun 4, 2007
07-C-225-S (W.D. Wis. Jun. 4, 2007)

In Evers v. Davis, 86 N.J.L. 196, this court said, "a defendant although he cannot be heard to say that it was not his duty to obey the statute, may show what he did in his effort to obey it, leaving it to the jury to say whether such effort was what a reasonably prudent person would have done in view of the statute."

Summary of this case from Henry v. Ehrlich Transfer Trucking Co., Inc.

In Evers v. Davis,86 N.J. Law 196, the court quoted with approval the following: "The legislature must be assumed to know the law, and if upon common law principles such a statute would affect private rights it must have been passed in anticipation of that result.

Summary of this case from Stokes v. Jenkins

In Evers v. Davis, 86 N.J.L. 196, Mr. Justice Garrison, speaking for this court (at p. 204), says: "Upon common law principles, therefore, when the legislature has by public statute established a certain standard of conduct in order to prevent a danger that it foresaw, which has in this regard forewarned the `ordinary prudent man,' and through him the defendant in a civil action, whose conduct must always coincide with this common law criterion.

Summary of this case from Rose v. Campbell
Case details for

Davis v. Evers

Case Details

Full title:ALLEN TONY DAVIS, Petitioner, v. SERGEANT EVERS, T. BELZ and OFFICER BRAY…

Court:United States District Court, W.D. Wisconsin

Date published: Jun 4, 2007

Citations

07-C-225-S (W.D. Wis. Jun. 4, 2007)

Citing Cases

McNamara v. Mechanics Trust Co.

1. Whatever benefit the tenant in a civil action derives from the Tenement House act ( Pamph. L. 1904, p.…

Whetzel v. Jess Fisher Management Co.

The law of torts can only be out of joint with community standards if it ignores the existence of such…

21 Citing Cases