Shimkus v. Caesar
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
1Opinion of the CourtJohnston, J.
Neither party had a statutory right of way or one in the same sense that a locomotive engineer has it; each owed to the other the reciprocal duty to act reasonably. Tetreault v. Gould, 83 N. H. 99.
In passing upon the motions for a nonsuit and for a directed verdict, the Court was obliged to consider the evidence for the plaintiff as true and to construe all the evidence most favorably to the plaintiff. Carney v. Railway, 72 N. H. 364, 369.
The defendant argues that since it was physically possible for the plaintiff to see the defendant and his automobile as quickly as the defendant could see…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Charbonneau v. MacRurySupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1931
- Carney v. Concord Street RailwaySupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1903
- Tetreault v. GouldSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1927
- MacKelvie v. RiceSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1943
- Halley v. BrownSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1942
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Johnston v. LynchSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1990
- Manseau v. Boston & Maine RailroadSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1949
- Stabrow v. StabrowSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1949