Legal Opinion

Mahoney v. Norcross

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided October 7, 1933PublishedCited by 51 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

By the Court.

The case at bar falls within the general principle that in an action arising from a collision between automobiles at intersecting streets the due care and contributory negligence of the plaintiff and the negligence, of the defendant present questions of fact. The finding in favor of the plaintiff imports a finding of all subsidiary facts essential to that conclusion and must stand unless unsupported by the evidence. Without summarizing the testimony it is enough to say that a finding in favor of the plaintiff was warranted. Ferreira v. Zaccolanti, 281 Mass. 91.

The defendant…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. John Hetherington & Sons, Ltd. v. William Firth Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1911
  2. Castano v. LeoneMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1932
  3. Ferreira v. ZaccolantiMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1932

3Cited by51 opinions

  1. Bresnick v. HeathMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1935
  2. Home Savings Bank v. SavranskyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1940
  3. Dolham v. PetersonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1937
  4. MacDonald v. AdamianMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1936
  5. Gibbons v. DenoncourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1937

46 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