From our private database of 22,300+ case briefs...
Stanley v. Powell
Queen’s Bench
1 QB 86 (1891)
Facts
A member of a hunting party (victim) (plaintiff) was injured when the shooter’s (defendant) bullet ricocheted off a tree and struck the victim in the eye. The victim sued for negligence. After conflicting evidence from both sides was presented, the jury answered special questions from the judge indicating that the jury believed that the victim was injured from a shot fired from the shooter’s gun, that the shooter was not acting negligently when he fired the gun, and that the victim suffered £100 in damages. Thereafter, the parties agreed to let the judge decide the case. The victim argued that the shooter should be liable because the victim was injured from a shot fired by the shooter and that the only excuse for the shooter’s liability would be if the jury also found that the injury-inducing act was inevitable. The shooter argued that, because the injury was not caused by his negligence or an intentional act, he was not liable in tort to the victim.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Denman, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 518,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 22,300 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
