Court Opinion

ID: 3493124
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2016-07-05 22:01:18.354714+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:54:49.120035
License: Public Domain

My views were stated in Easton v. Medema, 246 Mich. 130. They did not prevail. The court announced a rule, supported neither by the canon law, the civil law, the common law, or other law, which excludes intelligence and experience in determining culpability and disregards the rule that everyone is bound to use that degree of care which a reasonably prudent person of like age, intelligence and experience should ordinarily use under like circumstances. A rule that age, not sense; years, not intelligence; length of life, not experience, should govern responsibility for human action is unsound and should be discarded.
NORTH, J., did not sit. *Page 494