Summary of Davies v. Mann, 152 Eng. Rep. 588 (1842)
Facts: P had tied down his donkey’s feet to keep it from running away and the donkey was left by the side of the road. D was coming down in his wagon at high speed and hit the donkey and killed it.
Procedure: The trial judge informed the jury that even though the act of P might be illegal, but if proximate cause is attributable to the want of proper conduct on the part of the D, the action was maintainable and P can recover. The jury ruled for P.
Issue: Can P recover under the given facts?
Rationale: According to the court, even though there was negligence on part of the P, but D could have prevented the accident by use of ordinary care. “Were this not so, a man might justify the driving over goods left on public highway, or even over a man lying asleep there, or the purposely running against a carriage going on the wrong side of the road." Introduced the “Last Clear Chance" rule.