Legal Opinion

Thurston v. Ballou

Massachusetts Appeals Court

Decided March 30, 1987PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtKaplan, J.

The plaintiff Thurston was severely injured in a road accident and, in a regime of “comparative” negligence, has won a jury verdict and judgment representing one-half of the damage he suffered through the fault shared between the defendant Ballou (and thus Ballou’s corporate employer, also a defendant) and himself. The defendants appeal, claiming that the trial judge committed error, first, in denying their motions for a directed verdict at the close of the plaintiff’s case and again at the close of all the evidence, and, correspondingly, in denying their motion for judgment n.o.v. Connected…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Raunela v. Hertz Corp.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1972
  2. Cimino v. Milford Keg, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1982
  3. D'Annolfo v. Stoneham Housing AuthorityMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1978
  4. Porche v. Gulf Mississippi Marine CorporationDistrict Court, E.D. Louisiana · 1975
  5. Huff v. City of HolyokeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1982

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Flood v. Southland Corp.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 1992
  2. Sollin v. WanglerNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2001
  3. Dilaveris v. W.T. Rich Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1996
  4. Baudanza v. Comcast of Massachusetts I, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2009
  5. New Boston Select Group, Inc. v. DeMicheleMassachusetts Superior Court · 2002

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