"[t]hose portions of the court's charge ... rebut the defendants' claim that the court charged that only intentional conduct on the part of [the third party] would discharge the defendants"
How later courts described this case
- "[t]hose portions of the court's charge ... rebut the defendants' claim that the court charged that only intentional conduct on the part of [the third party] would discharge the defendants"
- actions that continue to be a proximate cause of injury even after another cause intervenes render actor liable to injured party
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
Armentano, J.
(dissenting). I disagree with the majority and dissent on the award of damages which is plainly excessive and exorbitant. The judgment should be set aside and the case remanded for a new trial on the issue of damages only or a remittitur should be ordered.