Legal Opinion
Smith v. Freedman
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Decided June 25, 1929PublishedCited by 40 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtCrosby, J.
The first action is to recover for personal injuries caused by a collision between the defendants’ truck, which was duly registered by them as owners, and an automobile in which the plaintiff May E. Smith (herein referred to as the plaintiff) was riding as a guest. The second action is brought by her husband to recover for consequential damages. The writ in each action was dated December 29, 1926.
There was no evidence relating to the question whether the driver of the truck at the time of the accident was acting within the scope of his employment, other than the answers of the defendant…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Luria v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
- Hanscom v. Malden & Melrose Gas Light Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1914
- Duggan v. Bay State Street Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1918
- Holmes v. HuntMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1877
- Paraboschi v. ShawMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1927
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by40 opinions
- Commonwealth v. DeCotisMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1974
- City Council of Waltham v. VinciulloMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1974
- Thomes v. Meyer Store Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1929
- Meunier's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1946
- Goes v. FeldmanMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1979
35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.