As the man jumped to catch the train, employees’ from the LIRR were trying to help him, when the package he was carrying fell to the rails. As a result of helping the man, the package exploded causing scales to fall on and injure passengers waiting for their train. The package which contained fireworks caused an explosion in which Mrs. Palsgraf and many others were injured, she later then sued the Long Island Railroad and won. The key point of the case that I felt changed the American Legal history was the opinions and different out looks each judge had toward the case.
There's a specialist from your university waiting to help you with that essay.
Tell us what you need to have done now!
order now
Later on these out looks would change history and the history of Tort Law. Judge Cardozo set a theory of duty and proximate causation that became the law of the state of New York, then eventually the law of the country. He wrote that the railroad was not liable, because the injury was unforeseeable. “Negligence is not actionable unless it involves the invasion of a legally protected interest or the violation of a right. Proof of the negligence in the air, so to speak will not do. Negligence is the absence of care according to the circumstances…
Judge William S. Andrews laid out a very contrary view to what Judge Cardozo had stated. Judge Andrews’s view were condemning a rule of foreseeability, he argued that it “is the act itself, not the intent of the actor which was important. ” The Court of Appeals decision was written by Judge Benjamin Cardozo which reversed the judgment. Cardozo stated that negligence is wrongful “because the eye of the vigilance perceives the risks of danger…The risk reasonably to be perceived defines the duty to be obeyed, and risk imports relation; it is to another or others within the range of apprehension. Cardozo prevailed by only 4 to 3, his holding became the touchstone for tort law.
Palsgraf represents a rejection of the view that Judge Andrew had and from this case it has established that rights and duties run between people of all kind. In conclusion, this case has made and changed history. There was nothing in the situation to suggest that with even the most cautious person, the package wrapped in newspaper would cause havoc in the station. Nobody knew that the man was carrying fireworks. It was the explosion that was the proximate cause of Palsgraf’ injuries, an act that was unforeseeable.
So the railroad was neither negligent nor at fault for Mrs. Palsgraf’ injuries. Negligence is not a tort unless it results in the commission of a wrong by violating one’s right.
