首页
外语
计算机
考研
公务员
职业资格
财经
工程
司法
医学
专升本
自考
实用职业技能
登录
外语
A century ago in the United States, when an individual brought suit against a company, public opinion tended to protect that com
A century ago in the United States, when an individual brought suit against a company, public opinion tended to protect that com
admin
2020-03-30
55
问题
A century ago in the United States, when an individual brought suit against a company, public opinion tended to protect that company. But perhaps this phenomenon was most striking in the case of the railroads. Nearly half of all negligence cases decided through 1896 involved railroads. And the railroads usually won.
Most of the cases were decided in state courts, when the railroads had the climate of the times on their sides. Government supported the railroad industry; the progress railroads represented was not to be slowed down by requiring them often to pay damages to those unlucky enough to be hurt working for them.
Court decisions always went against railroad workers. Mr. Farwell, an engineer, lost his right hand when a switchman’s negligence ran his engine off the track. The court reasoned that since Farwell had taken the job of an engineer voluntarily at good pay, he had accepted the risk. Therefore the accident, though avoidable had the switchmen acted carefully, was a "pure accident". In effect a railroad could never be held responsible for injury to one employee caused by the mistake of another.
In one case where a Pennsylvania Railroad worker had started a fire at a warehouse and the fire had spread several blocks, causing widespread damage, a jury found the company responsible for all the damage. But the court overturned the jury’s decision because it argued that the railroad’s negligence was the immediate cause of damage only to the nearest buildings. Beyond them the connection was too remote to consider.
As the century wore on, public sentiment began to turn against the railroads—against their economic and political power and high fares as well as against their callousness(无情)toward individuals.
Which of the following is NOT true in Farwell’s case?
选项
A、Farwell would not have been injured if the switchman had been more careful.
B、The court argued that the victim had accepted the risk since he had willingly taken his job.
C、The court decided that the railroad should not be held responsible.
D、Farwell was injured because he negligently ran his engine off the track.
答案
D
解析
根据文中第三段的“Mr.Farwell,an engineer,lost his right hand when a switchman’s negligence ran his engine off the track.”可知:法威尔先生是铁路部门的名工程师。当名扳道工因疏忽而导致车头脱离轨道时,法威尔失去了右手。据此可知,是位扳道工由于疏忽而导致法威尔受伤,而非法威尔因本人失误所致。D项的说法错误。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/C6TO777K
0
考博英语
相关试题推荐
Forsometimepastithasbeenwidelyacceptedthatbabies—andothercreatures—learntodothingsbecausecertainactsleadto
Whatarethoseofuswhohavechosencareersinscienceandengineeringabletodoaboutourcurrentproblems?First,wecan
ManycountrieswillnotallowcigaretteadvertisingintheirnewspapersoronTVespeciallysincetheadvertisementsareusually
Webbrowsers!Interactivesoftware!There’salotofnewtechnologytalkgoingoninpublicrelationsthesedays,andit’scomin
Theprivatelifeofhavingeachindividualmakehisorherownchoiceofbeliefsandinterest______withouttheoverarchingpubl
Withinthespanofahundredyears,intheseventeenthandearlyeighteenthcenturies,atideofemigration—oneofthegreatfol
AlthoughthisbookclaimstobeabiographyofGeorgeWashington,manyoftheincidentsareimaginary.
Thatbatteredoldhatofhisisa______joketoallhisfriends.
Themostexcitingkindofeducationisalsothemostpersonal.Nothingcan【C1】______thejoyofdiscoveringforyourselfsomethin
______,hewentouttoplayfootballwithhisfriends.
随机试题
Tomlikes()foreigncoins.
发散性思维的指标有:_______、_______和独特性。
A.分节运动B.蠕动C.蠕动冲D.集团蠕动小肠不会出现的运动形式是
关于乳牙龋的药物治疗说法不正确的是
药品出库应进行
期货公司制定投资者适当性标准的实施方案后,报()备案。
目前,最重要的征信法规当属()。
注册会计师交由被审计单位负责询证函的起草、寄发和收回。()
10.Base-T以太网使用曼彻斯特编码,其编码效率为(11)%,在快速以太网中使用4B/5B编码,其编码效率为(12)%。(12)
At10:24A.M.,whatdoesMs.Corellimeanwhenshesays,"What’stheholdup?"
最新回复
(
0
)