Legal Opinion

Bocock v. Rose

Tennessee Supreme Court

Decided December 5, 1963PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Dyer

In this opinion George Bradford Bocock will be referred to as plaintiff. Mr. and Mrs. Kenneth Rose, Sr., Mr. and Mrs. Ben Rose and Mr. and Mrs. Ray Garrett, Sr., as defendants.

The plaintiff sued defendants jointly and severally, for $25,000.00 damages as a result of an alleged assault and battery made upon the person of plaintiff, without cause or provocation, by the minor sons of defendants. The declaration alleged defendants had a duty to discipline their minor sons when they have knowledge of said sons’ propensities to assault others; that defendants knew or should have known their sons…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Condel v. SavoSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1944
  2. Caldwell v. ZaherMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1962
  3. Norton v. PayneWashington Supreme Court · 1929
  4. Highsaw v. CreechCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1933
  5. Bieker v. OwensSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1961

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Lavin v. JordonTennessee Supreme Court · 2000
  2. Dinsmore-Poff v. AlvordAlaska Supreme Court · 1999
  3. Snow v. NelsonDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1984
  4. Gummo ex rel. Gummo v. WardDistrict Court, M.D. Tennessee · 2014
  5. Lavin v. JordonTennessee Supreme Court · 2000

2 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