Leland v. Quinn

182 N.E. 475, 280 Mass. 320, 1932 Mass. LEXIS 1023
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court·Decided September 23, 1932·Published

Opinion

By the Court.

The only contention of the defendant, in this action of tort to recover compensation for personal injuries sustained by the plaintiff through his negligence, is that as matter of law the plaintiff was not in the exercise of due care or was guilty of contributory negligence. There was evidence tending to show that the plaintiff on the afternoon of a fair day while returning from a funeral started to cross a street, others being in front and still others behind her, looked in the direction from which the defendant came, where her vision was unobstructed for three hundred feet or more, and saw no automobile approaching; that as the plaintiff with her group neared the further side of the street her companions ran and reached the sidewalk in safety but she stepped back to let the defendant’s automobile, then almost upon her, pass in front of her and was struck by it and injured. Plainly the case was for the jury.

Exceptions overruled.

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

Leland v. Quinn, 182 N.E. 475, 280 Mass. 320, 1932 Mass. LEXIS 1023 (Mass. 1932).

182 N.E. 475 (Leland v. Quinn) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.