Cited by

d, and the necessity of showing a causal connection between its violation and the accident was plainly declared, and in Childs v. Standard Oil Co. 149 Minn. 166 , , it was held that the fact that plaintiff would have suffered no damage but for defendant’s tortious act did not necessitate the conclusion that such act was the proximate cause of the damage; and, in Schaar v. Conforth, 128 Minn. 460 , , that the inj ury must be the direct result of the violation of the statute.

Schaar v. Conforth, 128 Minn. 460 , .

Schaar v. Conforth, 128 Minn. 460 , .

The principle which is applicable is tersely stated in Schaar v. Conforth, 128 Minn. 460 , : “If the disobedience of the statute results in injury to one for whose protection it was passed, liability follows.” This principle has been applied to the sale of poisons, which is also regulated by statute, analogous to the statute now under consideration.

Schaar v. Conforth, 128 Minn. 460 , Hillstrom v. Mannheimer Bros. supra, page 202, .

2632, that “the light of the front lamp shall be visible at least two hundred feet in the direction in which the motor is proceeding,” was to fix by definite rule the distance which must be lighted and thus to remove from the province of the jury the duty of determining in particular cases what is a “reasonable distance.” The absence of a statutory light was negligence per se, Schaar v. Conforth, 128 Minn. 460 , ; Hillstrom v. Mannheimer Bros. supra, page 202, ; Unmacht v. Whitney, infra, page 3

Schaar v. Conforth, 128 Minn. 460 , ; Benson v. Larson, 133 Minn. 346 , .

Co. 121 Minn. 445 , ; Schaar v. Conforth, 128 Minn. 460 , .

Co. 121 Minn. 445 , ; Schaar v. Conforth, 128 Minn. 460 , ), for the evidence is by no means conclusive that Le Eoy did pass to the left of the center of the intersection.

Schaar v. Conforth, 128 Minn. 460 , .

Co. 122 Minn. 44 , ; Schaar v. Conforth, 128 Minn. 460 , .

Schaar v. Conforth, 128 Minn. 460 , .

This is the effect of Schaar v. Conforth, 128 Minn. 460 , , which involved, other provisions of the motor vehicle statute.

Schaar v. Conforth, 128 Minn. 460 , .