Hill v. Inhabitants of Seekonk
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Actions of tort to recover for injuries occasioned by a defect in a highway, which the defendant was bound to keep in repair.
Read the full summary
Actions of tort to recover for injuries occasioned by a defect in a highway, which the defendant was bound to keep in repair. The cases were tried together in the Superior Court, before Wilkinson J., who, after a verdict in each case for the plaintiff, allowed a bill of exceptions in substance as follows; The plaintiffs were riding on the highway in an open wagon, with the horse at a walk, on Fast Day, April 3,1873, and the accident occurred at about 5 o’clock in the afternoon. Thomas Hill, one of the _ plaintiffs, testified that they were driving along, his daughter, the other plaintiff,…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
The instruction that it was enough if the plaintiff looked ahead in such a manner as persons of ordinary prudence do in riding upon a highway was correct. The other instructions were, to say the least, sufficiently favorable to the defendant. The case was rightly submitted to the jury.
Exceptions overruled.
2Cited by5 opinions
- McFarlane v. City of Niagara FallsNew York Court of Appeals · 1928
- Heckman v. EvensonNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1897
- Woods v. City of BostonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1876
- Cutting v. Inhabitants of ShelburneMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1906
- Mahnke v. New Orleans City & Lake RailroadSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1900