Cited by

4 Healy v. Hoy, 115 Minn. 321 , .

On the question of proximate cause, this court in Healy v. Hoy, 115 Minn. 321, 323 , , said: “The question of proximate cause of an injury is often obscured by technical learning, but in its last analysis it is ordinarily a question of fact for the jury, to be solved by the exercise of good common sense in the consideration of the evidence in each particular case.

Healy v. Hoy, 115 Minn. 321 , ; Hogan v. Twin City Amusement Trust Estate, 155 Minn. 199 , .

The court said: “This daughter suffered the greatest pecuniary loss, the loss to the son of 20 might appeal to the jury as substantial, and the loss to children not presently dependent, while it could not possibly be large, might still be found to be more than nominal.” And in Healy v. Hoy, 115 Minn. 321 , , a 17-year old son, then attending an academy preparatory to taking a medical course at the university, was awarded $3,600 general damages for the death of his father.

Coultas v. Hennepin Paper Co. 114 Minn. 309 , ; Healy v. Hoy, 115 Minn. 321 ,132 K. W. 208; Wendt v. Bowman & Libby, 126 Minn. 509 , ; Moehlenbrock v. Parke, Davis & Co. 141 Minn. 154 , ; Hansman v. Western Union Tel.

In Healy v. Hoy, 115 Minn. 321 , , plaintiff’s intestate was injured by the negligence of defendant.

Healey v. Hoy, 115 Minn. 321 , .

Co. 108 Minn. 100 , : “Theorize as we may on the subject of proximate cause, it is in its last analysis a question of good common sense, to be solved by a practical consideration of the evidence in each particular case.” Substantially the same statement was repeated in Healy v. Hoy, 115 Minn. 321 , ; Wiles v. Great Northern Ry.

Co. 106 Minn. 375 , ; Healy v. Hoy, 115 Minn. 321 , ; State v. James, 123 Minn. 487 , ; Glidden v. Goodfellow, 124 Minn. 101 , , L.R.A.

See also Healy v. Hoy, 115 Minn. 321 , .

Healy v. Hoy, 115 Minn. 321 , .

Healy v. Hoy, 115 Minn. 321 , ; 1 Greenleaf, Evidence, §§ 483-185; Town of Derby v. Town of Salem, 30 Vt. 722 ; Howard v. Illinois Trust & S. Bank, 189 Ill.

Healy v. Hoy, 115 Minn. 321 , ; United States v. McCoy, 193 U. S. 593 , 24 Sup.

257 ; Jensen v. Commodore Mining Co. 94 Minn. *353 53 , ; Morey v. Shenango Furnace Co. 112 Minn. 528 , ; Healy v, Hoy, 115 Minn. 321 , ; Gillespie v. Great Northern Ry.

Co. 108 Minn. 100 , ; Healy v. Hoy, 115 Minn. 321 , ; La Pray v. Lavoris Chemical Co. 117 Minn. 152 , ; Murphy v. Twin City Taxicab Co. 122 Minn. 363 , .