...that the injury must be the natural and probable consequence of the negligence — such a consequence as, under the surrounding circumstances of the case,...been foreseen by the wrongdoer as likely to flow from the act." In the light of these and other authorities, and the undisputed evidence in these cases,...

...determine whether the injury was the natural and probable consequence of the negligence; such a consequence as under the surrounding circumstances of the case...foreseen by the wrongdoer as likely to flow from his act. What would be more quickly apprehended by one setting fire to dry leaves and brush, than that it would...

...that the injury must be the natural and probable consequence of the negligence; such a consequence as, under the surrounding circumstances of the case, might and ought to have been seen by the wrong-doer as likely to flow from bis act. Railway Co. v. Taylor, 104 Pa. St. 306; Township...

...that the injury must be the natural and probable consequence of the negligence, such a consequence as under the surrounding circumstances of the case...by the wrongdoer as likely to flow from his act." . . . The doctrine announced in Scheffer v. Railroad Co., 105 US 249, 26 L. Ed. 1070, is applicable...

...injury.78 The injury must be "the natural and probable consequence, of the negligence, such a consequence as under the surrounding circumstances of the case...might and ought to have been foreseen by the wrongdoer and likely to flow from the act." 73 Thus, the fact that streets are in a defective condition cannot...

...contributory negligence would not, as a matter of law, be imputed to the child whose action is peuding for the Independent injury, as she was but six years...is not responsible in any case for an injury which is1 not thus proxlmatcly the result of his negligence, and he Is not responsible for indirect consequences...

..."that the injury must be the natural and probable consequence of the negligence— such a consequence as, under the surrounding circumstances of the case,...the •wrongdoer as likely to flow from his act." In Pennsylvania Railroad Company v. Kerr, 62 Pa. 353, 1 Am. Rep. 431, Chief Justice Thompson, delivering...

...that the injury must be the natural and probable consequence of the negligence; such a consequence as, under the surrounding circumstances of the case, might and ought to have been seen by the wrongdoer as likely to flow from his act. (Mitchell v. Rochester Railway Co., 151 NY 107;...

...the proximate cause, the true rule is that the injury must be the natural and probable consequence as, under the surrounding circumstances of the case, might and ought to have been seen by the wrongdoer as likely to flow from his act,' etc. Tested by this rule we regard the injury...

...probable consequence of the negligence — such consequences, as under the surrounding circumstances might and ought to have been foreseen by the wrongdoer as likely to flow from his act. Such is the rule laid down in the case cited by the plaintiff in error, in the case of Hoag vs. Lake...