Legal Opinion · Dissent

Meaney v. Rubega

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Decided December 31, 1997No. 95-320Published

1DissentJohnson, J.

I respectfully dissent because I firmly believe that a defendant’s claim of sudden brake failure constitutes an affirmative defense.

Whether “sudden brake failure” constitutes an affirmative defense presents us with a question of first impression. Dyer v. Herb Prout & Co., 126 N.H. 763, 498 A.2d 715 (1985), cited by the majority, had nothing to do with sudden brake failure; that case involved a vehicle which left the highway, turned over, and burst into flames. We held that the trial court erroneously gave the jury a “pure accident” instruction.

In the case of “sudden brake failure,” some…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Savage v. BlancettAppellate Court of Illinois · 1964
  2. Harris v. Irish Truck Lines, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1974
  3. McVey v. St. Louis Public Service CompanySupreme Court of Missouri · 1960
  4. Dyer v. Herb Prout & Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1985
  5. Bourke v. WattsNebraska Supreme Court · 1986

5 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