Legal Opinion

Palomebella v. Foss

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided November 2, 1931PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRugg, C.J.

This is ah action of tort to recover compensation for damage to an automobile owned and operated by the plaintiff and for personal injuries received by him, alleged to have been caused by reason of a collision with an automobile' owned and negligently operated by the defendant. The answer was a general denial and an allegation of contributory negligence. The exceptions raise only the question whether the case rightly was submitted to the jury oh the due care and contributory negligence of the plaintiff. O’Connor v. Hickey, 268 Mass. 454. The burden of proving contributory negligence rested…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. O'Connor v. HickeyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1929
  2. Clay v. Pope & Cottle Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1930
  3. Dillon v. PlimptonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1921

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Campbell v. AshlerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1946
  2. Ferreira v. ZaccolantiMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1932
  3. Walsh v. WilsonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1932
  4. Fallon v. LandersMassachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 1954
  5. Hunter v. State Street Garage Corp.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 1976

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API