Chemikles v. J. M. Wilson Co.
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
1Opinion of the CourtBranch, J.
In support of its contention that a verdict should have been directed in its favor, the defendant seeks to establish two propositions as follows: 1. There was no evidence that the driver of defendant’s truck was negligent. 2. The evidence is conclusive that the plaintiff was negligent.
1. There was evidence from which it might be found that the defendant’s truck was started from a stationary position in a city street and after traveling a distance of 46 feet at a speed of from five to seven miles per hour, ran down the plaintiff who was all the time within the range of the driver’s vision. The…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- McCarthy v. SoutherSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1927
- Lyman v. Boston & Maine RailroadSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1890
- Olsen v. Boston & Maine RailroadSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1925
- Quimby v. Boston & Maine RailroadSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1920
3Cited by6 opinions
- MacKelvie v. RiceSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1943
- Jackson v. SmartSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1937
- Gosselin v. LemaySupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1931
- Colby v. AverySupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1945
- Simoneau v. General Ice Cream Corp.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1931
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.