Legal Opinion

Rash v. Albert

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided May 26, 1930PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtField, J.

In this action of tort for negligence a verdict for the plaintiff was returned by the jury, but in,accordance with leave reserved the judge ordered the entry of a verdict *249for the defendant. G. L. c. 231, § 120. The plaintiff excepted.

The plaintiff seeks to recover damages for injury to his left eye, alleged to have been caused by the collapse of a bridge across a stream in the town of Lanesborough, due to the negligence of the defendant. It appeared in evidence that the “road on both sides of the bridge was accepted by the town of Lanesborough, and the bridge was open and used freely by the…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Navien v. CohenMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1929
  2. Mooney v. Connecticut River Lumber Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1891
  3. Green's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1929
  4. Washburn v. R. F. Owens Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1927
  5. Commonwealth v. HelfmanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1927

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. DeFilippo's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1933
  2. Comeau v. BeckMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1946
  3. Duggan's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1944
  4. Fulton v. Edison Electric Illuminating Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1939
  5. Sheppard's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1934

2 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