Adams v. Swift

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Adams v. Swift

52 N.E. 1068, 172 Mass. 521, 1899 Mass. LEXIS 838

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court·Decided February 28, 1899·Published·Cited by 12 cases

Opinion

Barker, J.

The evidence justified a finding that the excursion was a joint undertaking, of which Caroline F. Swift, the mother of the young woman who was driving when the accident happened, was an equal promoter and manager, and not a mere guest; and thatfunder her control and direction her daughter, so inexperienced a whip that it might be negligence to allow her to drive upon such an occasion, was driving, and driving carelessly. Therefore the case was for the jury.

The evidence of admissions was for the jury, and the rulings were right.

Exceptions overruled.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Barker, J.

The evidence justified a finding that the excursion was a joint undertaking, of which Caroline F. Swift, the mother of the young woman who was driving when the accident happened, was an equal promoter and manager, and not a mere guest; and thatfunder her control and direction her daughter, so inexperienced a whip that it might be negligence to allow her to drive upon such an occasion, was driving, and driving carelessly. Therefore the case was for the jury.

The evidence of admissions was for the jury, and the rulings were right.

Exceptions overruled.

Adams v. Swift, 52 N.E. 1068, 172 Mass. 521, 1899 Mass. LEXIS 838 (Mass. 1899).

Pincite

52 N.E. 1068 (Adams v. Swift) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related