Richards v. Richards
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
1Opinion of the CourtMarble, J.
The law of Massachusetts governs the rights of the parties. Cole v. Morse, 85 N. H. 214; Lee v. Chamberlin, 84 N. H. 182. And it is conceded that there can be no recovery under the law of that jurisdiction unless the defendant was grossly negligent.
The plaintiffs’ evidence tended to prove the following facts.
The defendant was driving the plaintiffs from Exeter in this state to Haverhill, Massachusetts, at the request of his sister-in-law, Mrs. Richards, plaintiff in the first named action. His car was a Ford sedan. Mrs. Richards was sitting on the front seat at his right, and Mrs. Cleveland…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- McCarthy v. SoutherSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1927
- Meeney v. DoyleMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1931
- Oppenheim v. BarkinMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1928
- Kirby v. KeatingMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1930
- Lemay v. Springfield Street Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1911
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Rubbelke v. JacobsenNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1936
- La Vigne v. La VigneOregon Supreme Court · 1945
- Larson v. StormNebraska Supreme Court · 1940
- Smith v. Boston & Maine RailroadSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1937