Roberts v. Southwick

Nolan, J.,

(dissenting, with whom Liacos, C.J., and Abrams, J., join). The trial judge in this case excluded evidence which was not only relevant but crucial to the plaintiffs case. For this reason, the plaintiff is entitled to a new trial, and therefore I dissent.

The majority’s opinion rests on an issue which is not before this court. See Mass. R. A. P. 16 (a) (4), as amended, 367 Mass. 921 (1975). Whether the OSHA regulations were properly offered in evidence is an issue which was not raised, briefed, or argued by either party. Indeed, contrary to the court’s holding, both parties assume in…