Damage Liability of Charitable Institutions

Zollman, Carl

Journal: Michigan Law Review

Volume: 19

First Page: 395

Year: 1921

Bluebook Citation: 19 MICH. L. REV. 395 (1921)

Author: Carl Zollman: all 26 publications


Citation analytics

How this journal article sits in the citation network, derived from CiteLaw's graph of published opinions.

Cited
3
Citing decisions
3
Courts citing

Citations by decade

1
1
1
1920s1940s1950s

Courts citing this journal article

N.Y.1
N.Y. Sup. Ct.1
Vt.1
Most recently cited by3
  • 1950Foster v. Roman Catholic Diocese Vt.
  • 1940Post v. Crown Heights Hospital, Inc. N.Y. Sup. Ct.
  • 1925Hamburger v. Cornell University N.Y.

Counts reflect decisions in the CiteLaw corpus and may lag very recent opinions.


Abstract

The question of the liability of charitable institutions to actions for damages presents great difficulties. This is not due how- -ever to a lack of cases. The question has peculiarly "engaged the attention of the bench and bar of the country. The problem has been scrutinized from every conceivable viewpoint.

The arguments for and against have well nigh been exhausted, and little, if anything, new remains to be advanced".' In their opinions the courts have frequently gone back to certain English cases disregarding the points decided but stressing certain dicta which have been uttered by the judges which decided them. It is curious t6 note that none of these cases was really in point. Dunkan v. Findlader, decided in 1839, involved a claim against the treasurer of a turnpike road which seems to have been a public corporation.2 In Mercy Docks v. Gibbs, decided in 1864, the defendant was a corporation which provided docking facilities and the plaintiff claimed that a cargo of guano had come to grief on account of defendant's negligence.8 Herriots' Hospital v. Ross, decided in 1846, involved a claim for damages on the part of an applicant for rejection from the benefit of the charity.4 Though these and other English cases" on their very face did not involve the question in which we are interested they have nevertheless been drawn on extensively and made to support propositions which would have astonished the judges who wrote the opinions. It would waste valuable space to no useful purpose to attempt to trace the use which has been made of these cases by American Courts.

They will therefore be passed by hereafter with- ,out any further reference.

Chat with this journal article using AI

Ask CiteLaw's AI Navigator anything about this journal article, verify citations, and research related authorities. Sign up for CiteLaw free today to get started.