Legal Opinion

Craig v. Parkhurst

Supreme Court of Vermont

Decided February 11, 1941PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtButtles, J.

The plaintiff and defendant were walking through woodland, the defendant- in advance of the plaintiff. While so walking the plaintiff suffered an injury which resulted in the loss of his right eye, caused, he alleges, by negligence of the defendant in bending over a portion of a bush, or tree, which it appears might more properly be called a small sapling, and then allowing it to fly back and strike the plaintiff’s eye. In this tort action the plaintiff seeks damages for such alleged negligence.

Verdict and judgment were for the plaintiff and the defendant comes here on exception to the denial…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Wellman, Admr. v. WalesSupreme Court of Vermont · 1925
  2. Steele v. FullerSupreme Court of Vermont · 1932
  3. Gover v. Central Vermont Railway Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1922
  4. Goodwin, Admx. v. GastonSupreme Court of Vermont · 1931
  5. Widham v. Town of BrattleboroSupreme Court of Vermont · 1933

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Packard v. QuesnelSupreme Court of Vermont · 1941
  2. Watterlund v. BillingsSupreme Court of Vermont · 1942
  3. Huestis v. Estate of LaphamSupreme Court of Vermont · 1943
  4. Benoit v. MarvinSupreme Court of Vermont · 1958
  5. Bouchard v. SicardSupreme Court of Vermont · 1944

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API