Bliss v. Inhabitants of South Hadley
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Tort, by the administrator of the estate of Frank E. Bliss, under the Pub. Sts. c. 52, § 17, for the loss of the life of his intestate on April 22, 1885, occasioned by an alleged defect in Grant Street and Bridge Street, in South Hadley.
Read the full summary
Tort, by the administrator of the estate of Frank E. Bliss, under the Pub. Sts. c. 52, § 17, for the loss of the life of his intestate on April 22, 1885, occasioned by an alleged defect in Grant Street and Bridge Street, in South Hadley. Trial in the Superior Court, before BarJcer, J., who allowed a bill of exceptions, in substance as follows : The intestate was, at the time of his death, April 22, 1885, one year and ten months old, and the alleged injury occurred .two weeks before. The plaintiff resided, with his wife and four children, of whom the intestate was one, in Grant Street, and…
1Opinion of the CourtMorton, C. J.
It cannot be said, as matter of law, that it was negligence on the part of the parents of the intestate to send him into the street for air and exercise in the charge of his brother Leon, who was eight years old. It was a question of fact, depending upon how much the street was used, and upon the intelligence, capacity, and experience of Leon, and was properly submitted to the jury. The evidence does not disclose any decisive act of negligence on the part of Leon, and it was for the jury to determine whether he was exercising reasonable diligence in the care of his infant brother.
It was…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Gulline v. City of LowellMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1887
3Cited by11 opinions
- Reed v. City of MadisonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1892
- Wershba v. City of LynnMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1949
- Passamaneck's Admr. v. Louisville Railway Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1895
- Pinto v. BrennanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1926
- Beaudin v. Bay CityMichigan Supreme Court · 1904
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.