Cited by
Opinions in Arizona that cite Inspiration Consolidated Copper Co. v. Conwell, 190 P. 88.
- Pacific Construction Co. v. Cochran 243 P. 405 Ariz. 1926
-
Pacific Construction Co. v. Cochran
243 P. 405
Ariz. 1926
Section 5, article 18, of the state Constitution provides that— “The defense of contributory negligence or of assumption of risk shall, in all cases whatsoever, be a question of fact and shall, at all times, be left to the jury.” , 190 Pac.
- Morenci Southern Railway Co. v. Monsour 206 P. 589 Ariz. 1922
-
Morenci Southern Railway Co. v. Monsour
206 P. 589
Ariz. 1922
e Constitution of Arizona, article 18, section 5, provides: “The defense of contributory negligence or of assumption of risk shall, in all cases whatsoever, be a question of fact and shall, at all times, be left to the jury.” This is not the first time this question has been before this court for consideration, , 190 Pac.
- Varela v. Reid 204 P. 1017 Ariz. 1922
-
Varela v. Reid
204 P. 1017
Ariz. 1922
This constitutional provision has been construed and applied by this court in several cases, notably, , 190 Pac.
- Marchese v. Metheny 203 P. 567 Ariz. 1922
- Wiser v. Copeland 203 P. 565 Ariz. 1922
- Wiser v. Copeland 203 P. 565 Ariz. 1922
- Followed Marchese v. Metheny 203 P. 567 Ariz. 1922
- Town of Flagstaff v. Gomez 202 P. 401 Ariz. 1921
-
Town of Flagstaff v. Gomez
202 P. 401
Ariz. 1921
And, since “that cause is proximate without which the accident would not have happened” ( , 190 Pac.
- Industrial Commission v. Crisman 199 P. 390 Ariz. 1921
- Industrial Commission v. Crisman 199 P. 390 Ariz. 1921
- Davis v. Boggs 199 P. 116 Ariz. 1921
-
Davis v. Boggs
199 P. 116
Ariz. 1921
P. R. Co. v. Kellogg, 94 U. S. 469 , 24 L. Ed. 256 (see, also, Rose’s U. S. Notes); , 190 Pac.
- Arizona Binghampton Copper Co. v. Dickson 195 P. 538 Ariz. 1921
- Arizona Binghampton Copper Co. v. Dickson 195 P. 538 Ariz. 1921