Kennedy v. R. & L. Co.
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Toet for personal injuries received, when the plaintiff was in an automobile owned by the defendant, by reason of a collision between it and another automobile. Writ dated February 9, 1914. In the Superior Court the case was tried before King, J. The material evidence is described in the opinion. There was a verdict for the plaintiff in the sum of $15,505, of which the plaintiff remitted all but $9,505. The defendant alleged exceptions.
1Opinion of the CourtBbaley, J.
The plaintiff’s due care is conceded, and if, without deciding, it is assumed the jury further could find that the car had been dispatched by a duly authorized agent of the company, that the unlicensed driver while operating the automobile was its servant, and that the plaintiff’s injuries were caused by his negligence, the plaintiff cannot recover unless the defendant had undertaken the duty of providing her with transportation; *208or, as averred in the declaration, that "she was lawfully travel-ling” in its car.
The company, although engaged in the sale of automobiles, did not let them for hire…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Freeman v. United Fruit Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1916
- Cartlidge v. SloanSupreme Court of Alabama · 1899
- Herlihy v. SmithMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1874
- United Shoe Machinery Co. v. HoltMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1904
- Walker v. FullerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1916
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Flynn v. LewisMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1919
- Theriault v. PierceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1940
- Marsal v. HickeyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1916
- Little v. LevisonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1944