Legal Opinion

Smiddy v. O'Neil

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided October 1, 1931PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRugg, C.J.

The evidence in its aspect most favorable to the plaintiff would warrant the finding of these facts: The defendant, with his automobile which he drove, met the plaintiff by appointment at her home in Holyoke. They had been acquainted for a good many years. She had ridden with him on numerous, previous occasions and knew he was a good driver. At her request the defendant in his automobile first drove with her to Hadley and then to Westfield. On the return from Westfield to Holyoke, at a little after ten o’clock in the evemng, the defendant drove to the left of the center of the road…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Altman v. AronsonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1919
  2. Massaletti v. FitzroyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1917
  3. Cook v. ColeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1931
  4. West v. PoorMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1907
  5. Meeney v. DoyleMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1931

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Pittsley v. DavidMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1937
  2. Isaacson v. Boston, Worcester & New York Street Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1932
  3. Swengil v. MartinNebraska Supreme Court · 1933
  4. Desroches v. HollandMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1934
  5. MacEachern v. StielerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1935

3 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