Torts I, Pages 218–219
Osborne v. McMasters
Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1889
Facts:
Defendant's clerk sold plaintiff's intestate a deadly poison without labeling it "poison," as statute requires one to do.
Procedural History:
Lower court ruled for plaintiff.
Issue:
Is violating a statute made to protect people negligence by itself?
Rule:
Violation of a statute that is for the protection or benefit of others constitutes conclusive evidence of negligence.
Reasoning:
Defendant clearly violated statute that protected people.
Holding:
Yes, violating a statute made to protect people is negligence by itself. Affirmed.