Legal Opinion

Brocklesby v. City of Newton

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided March 3, 1936PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtQua, J.

These are actions for the conscious suffering and death of the plaintiff’s intestate, alleged to have resulted from a defect in a highway.

The only questions before us arise from the refusal of the judge to grant rulings requested by the defendant in each case to the effect that the statutory notice given by the plaintiff to the defendant of the time, place and cause of the injury was inadequate. On the first day of the trial, and again during the final arguments, colloquies took place between counsel and with the court, from which the judge was well justified in concluding that the defendant…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Oscanyan v. Arms Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1881
  2. Mercier v. Union Street Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1918
  3. Graustein v. H. P. Hood & Sons, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1936
  4. Stemmler v. . Mayor, Etc., of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1904
  5. Gay v. City of CambridgeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1880

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

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Dalton v. Post Publishing Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1952
  2. Paddock v. Town of BrooklineMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1964
  3. Dominick v. DominickMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1984
  4. City of Quincy v. Brooks-Skinner, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1950
  5. Household Fuel Corp. v. HamacherMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1954

15 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