# Wolff v. Light

> North Dakota Supreme Court · February 9, 1968 · 156 N.W.2d 175

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9737193

## Case

- **Full name:** Ardel WOLFF, Individually and as Trustee for the North Dakota Workmen’s Compensation Bureau, Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. Dudly LIGHT, Defendant and Respondent
- **Court:** North Dakota Supreme Court
- **Decided:** February 9, 1968
- **Citations:** 156 N.W.2d 175; 1968 N.D. LEXIS 118
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Strutz
- **Judges:** Knudson, Teigen, Strutz, Erickstad, Paulson
- **Cited by:** 28 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9737193

## Opinion text

STRUTZ, Justice
(dissenting).
I join in the very able dissent of Judge Teigen. In addition to what Judge Teigen says, however, I would point out that the defendant’s alleged negligence was not the proximate cause of the injuries suffered by the plaintiff. The plaintiff’s own act was an intervening cause of the injuries of which he complains. Let us assume, for the purpose of argument, that the defendant’s conduct did amount to negligence. Was that conduct the proximate cause of the plaintiff’s injuries? I think not. Defendant’s alleged negligence, at best, created a static condition which would not have harmed the plaintiff. It was the plaintiff’s own rash act of attempting to remove the broken glass long after the accident had occurred that was in fact the cause of plaintiff’s injuries. Plaintiff’s own act was an intervening cause. As we said in Severinson v. Nerby (N.D.), 105 N.W.2d 252 , legal responsibility must be limited to those causes which are so closely connected with the result that the law is justified in imposing liability.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9737193. Public record. Not legal advice.