The following excerpt is from United States v. Marshall, 230 F.2d 183 (9th Cir. 1956):
"On the question of proximate cause Binford v. Johnston, 82 Ind. 426, 42 Am. Rep. 508, is in point. * * * `It is firmly settled that the intervention of a third person or of other and new direct causes does not preclude a recovery if the injury was the natural or probable result of the original wrong. * * * The rule goes so far as to hold that the original wrong-doer is responsible, even though the agency of a second wrongdoer intervened.' * * *"
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.