| http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#value | - However, ???this argument [did] not answer the question of whether such a device or installation was sufficient to free the defendant from negligence.???16 Consequently, the defendant???s act of God defense was denied, particularly because there was ???no evidence to justify the conclusion the wind was of such force as to be unforeseeable as a probability in Milwaukee.???17 As a result, the injury
|
