Legal Opinion

Macheras v. Syrmopoulos

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided May 3, 1946PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSpalding, J.

The only question here is whether the defence of res judicata, pleaded by the defendant, was established as matter of law.

The facts, which are not in dispute, are these: The present action is one of tort brought by the plaintiff to recover for personal injuries resulting from the alleged negligent operation of an automobile by the defendant. The evidence introduced by the plaintiff showed that her injuries were sustained on July 19,. 1943, when an automobile which she was driving on Salem Street, Lowell, collided with an automobile driven by the defendant. (We assume that it could have been…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Opinion of the Justices to the Senate & the House of RepresentativesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1925
  2. United States v. ParkerSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
  3. New York Central & Hudson River Railroad v. T. Stuart & Son Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1927
  4. Biggio v. MageeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1930
  5. Wight v. WightMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1930

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

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Insurance Rating Board v. Commissioner of InsuranceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1969
  2. Wishnewsky v. Town of SaugusMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1950
  3. Dynan v. FritzMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1987
  4. Travelers Insur. Co. v. GodseyCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1971
  5. Houghton v. HarrisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955

12 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