Legal Opinion

Magnuson v. Gottholm

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided January 3, 1928PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSanderson, J.

These are three actions of tort to recover damages for personal injuries alleged to have been caused by the explosion of illuminating gas. The defendant was the owner of a three apartment house, and the plaintiff Carl Magnuson was tenant at will of the middle apartment. The other plaintiffs are members of his family. All the plaintiffs were injured by the same explosion, which occurred in the apartment occupied by them.

On the day of the accident an electrician, employed by the defendant, had been changing the lighting system from gas to electricity and had taken down and replaced the gas…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Morris v. WeeneMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1927
  2. Olsen v. New England Fuel & Transportation Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1925

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Boyle v. Cambridge Gas Light Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1954
  2. Tucker v. Haverhill Electric Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1928
  3. Ingersoll Grove Nursing Home v. Springfield Gas Light Co.Massachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 1973

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

Powered by the Exa API