Legal Opinion

Cozzi v. Hooksett

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Decided January 6, 1931PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMarble, J.

Prior to the passage of Laws 1925, c. 52, the liability of towns for injuries caused to travelers by the defective railing of dangerous highway embankments was determined by the common-law rule of reasonableness. Ahern v. Concord, 82 N. H. 246, 248; Prichard v. Boscawen, 78 N. H. 131, 133; Seeton v. Dunbarton, 72 N. H. 269, and cases cited.

Although the statute of highways had its inception in the days of horse-drawn vehicles, its provisions were held to embrace new methods of travel (Hendry v. North Hampton, 72 N. H. 351, 356) including the automobile (Richmond v. Bethlehem, 79 N. H. 78, 81).…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Mulhall v. Nashua Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1921
  2. Clark v. HamptonSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1929
  3. Prichard v. BoscawenSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1916
  4. Wilder v. ConcordSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1903
  5. Ingerson v. Grand Trunk RailwaySupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1919

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Smith v. SharpIdaho Supreme Court · 1960
  2. Dunbeck v. Exeter & Hampton Electric Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1979
  3. Overton v. Wenatchee Beebe Orchard Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1947
  4. Harmon v. RichardsonSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1936
  5. Mudgett v. McDonaldSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1932

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