Legal Opinion

Antokol v. Barber

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided April 7, 1924PublishedCited by 37 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRugg, C.J.

This is an action of tort. It was alleged in the declaration in effect that, by reason of negligent operation by the defendant of an automobile truck, it ran into the stationary automobile of the plaintiff and “ greatly damaged it.” There was in the writ a general allegation of damage to the plaintiff. At the trial, the due care of the plaintiff and the negligence of the defendant were conceded. The only controversy related to damages. No objection was made to recovery for cost of repairs made on the automobile of the plaintiff. The plaintiff, having offered evidence that he had used his…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Sibley v. NasonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1907
  2. C. W. Hunt Co. v. Boston Elevated Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1908
  3. Smith v. CommonwealthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1911
  4. Jackson v. InnesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1919
  5. Freeman v. RobinsonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1921

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

3Cited by37 opinions

  1. Vicor Corp. v. Vigilant InsuranceCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2012
  2. Weller v. Hayes Truck LinesSupreme Court of Missouri · 1946
  3. Potier v. A. W. Perry, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1934
  4. Muchnick v. Post Publishing Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1955
  5. Lynch v. LyonsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1939

32 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