Legal Opinion
Knowles v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Decided September 10, 1934PublishedCited by 19 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtField, J.
This is an action of tort to recover compensation for personal injuries sustained by the plaintiff. There was a verdict for the plaintiff, but the judge, under leave reserved, directed the entry of a verdict for the defendant. The case comes before us on the exceptions of the plaintiff to the direction of the entry of the verdict and to the exclusion of evidence.
The entry of the verdict was directed rightly. The plaintiff — the only witness who testified to the way in which the accident occurred — when leaving the defendant’s store about four o’clock in the afternoon of December 3, 1929,…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- McNicholas v. New England Telephone & Telegraph Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1907
- Atlas v. Silsbury-Gamble Motors Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1932
- Prushensky v. PucilowskiMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1929
- Mahoney v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1929
- Lowner v. New York, New Haven, & Hartford RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1900
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Cleary v. First National Stores Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1935
- Viands v. Safeway Stores, Inc.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1954
- State v. SmithNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1965
- State v. LowryNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1967
- Burwick v. McClureMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1945
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.