Legal Opinion

Margaret F. Schell, Administratrix v. Ford Motor Company

Court of Appeals for the First Circuit

Decided September 1, 1959No. 5493PublishedCited by 22 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WOODBURY, Chief Judge.

There is no substantial dispute over the basic facts before us on this appeal.

The plaintiff’s intestate was a painter employed by J. I. Hass Company, Inc., which had a contract to paint the interior of the defendant’s plant in Somerville, Massachusetts. He, with other painters, on orders of their employer, reported for work at the gate of defendant’s plant at about 7:20 on the morning of. October 8, 1954. There they were informed by the defendant’s uniformed guard that they would have to make out a pass before they would be allowed to enter the premises and they were…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Yorke v. TaylorMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1955
  2. Cohen v. SantoianniMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1953
  3. Barrett v. ConraganMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1938
  4. Shaw v. Victoria Coach Line, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1943
  5. King v. Motor Mart Garage Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1957

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. Sharon v. City of NewtonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2002
  2. Lee v. Allied Sports Associates, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1965
  3. V.S.H. Realty, Inc. v. Texaco, Inc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1985
  4. Roger Burten D/B/A Rainy Day Games & Toys v. Milton Bradley CompanyCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1985
  5. Donald E. Carlson v. FedEx Ground Package Systems, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2015

17 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