Fields v. Oberstein

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Fields v. Oberstein

199 N.E.2d 534, 347 Mass. 777

CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

DecidedMay 28, 1964

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 199 N.E.2d 534 (Fields v. Oberstein) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Fields v. Oberstein, 199 N.E.2d 534, 347 Mass. 777 (Mass. 1964).

Pincite

Opinion

Exceptions overruled. This is an action of tort to recover damages for personal injuries alleged to have been sustained by the minor plaintiff, Robert, on May 24, 1957, in the defendant’s nursery. At the time of the accident Robert was four years and four months old. He was found “lying beside the slide.” It was described as “a regular slide that one usually finds in playgrounds.” We have examined the record and are satisfied that the evidence was insufficient to remove the cause of the accident from conjecture. The evidence was also insufficient to prove that supervision or lack of supervision by the defendant was the proximate cause of Robert’s injury. The instant case is clearly distinguishable from Sullivan v. Hamacher, 339 Mass. 190, and others cited by the plaintiff. There was no error in the direction of a verdict for the defendant.

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

Exceptions overruled. This is an action of tort to recover damages for personal injuries alleged to have been sustained by the minor plaintiff, Robert, on May 24, 1957, in the defendant’s nursery. At the time of the accident Robert was four years and four months old. He was found “lying beside the slide.” It was described as “a regular slide that one usually finds in playgrounds.” We have examined the record and are satisfied that the evidence was insufficient to remove the cause of the accident from conjecture. The evidence was also insufficient to prove that supervision or lack of supervision by the defendant was the proximate cause of Robert’s injury. The instant case is clearly distinguishable from Sullivan v. Hamacher, 339 Mass. 190, and others cited by the plaintiff. There was no error in the direction of a verdict for the defendant.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

199 N.E.2d 534, 347 Mass. 777, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fields-v-oberstein-mass-1964.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack