Legal Opinion

Flansberg v. Heywood Bros.

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided June 17, 1908PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHammond, J.

The verdict for the plaintiff which was given at a former trial of this case was set aside upon the ground that the plaintiff had not shown that he was in the exercise of due care. 190 Mass. 125. At the second trial the judge ruled that the plaintiff was not entitled to recover, and ordered a verdict for the defendant; and the case is before us upon the plaintiff’s exceptions.

It is argued by the plaintiff that the evidence at this second trial differs from that given at the first and is more favorable to him, and that he was entitled therefore to go to the jury. We have carefully collated the…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Flansberg v. Heywood Bros. & Wakefield Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1906

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Davidson v. Miners & Mechanics Savings & Trust Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1935
  2. Roe v. DoeSupreme Court of Delaware · 1914
  3. Sellick v. SellickMichigan Supreme Court · 1919
  4. Stevens, Exr. v. StevensOhio Supreme Court · 1929
  5. Trustees of Kenyon College v. Cleveland Trust Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1935

5 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