Levy v. H. E. Fletcher Co.

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Levy v. H. E. Fletcher Co.

252 N.E.2d 219, 356 Mass. 728

CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

DecidedNovember 4, 1969

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 252 N.E.2d 219 (Levy v. H. E. Fletcher Co.) 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

Levy v. H. E. Fletcher Co., 252 N.E.2d 219, 356 Mass. 728 (Mass. 1969).

Pincite

Opinion

In this action of tort to recover for the conscious suffering and death of the plaintiff’s testate, the plaintiff excepted to the allowance of the defendant’s motion for a directed verdict. The plaintiff’s testate, an employee of an independent contractor, sustained his injuries in a fall through a portion of the roof of the defendant’s building which his employer had undertaken to repair. Roofing work is hazardous, and reasonable examination by the independent contractor or its employees would have disclosed the condition which produced the fatal injury to the plaintiff’s testate. Favereau v. Gabele, 262 Mass. 118, 119. There was no duty to warn laid upon the defendant unless the defendant had some reason, which does not appear, to consider that a warning was necessary. Cadogan v. Boston Consol. Gas Co. 290 Mass. 496, 499-500. There is no evidence of any violation of any duty owed to the plaintiff’s testate by the defendant.

Exceptions overruled.

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

In this action of tort to recover for the conscious suffering and death of the plaintiff’s testate, the plaintiff excepted to the allowance of the defendant’s motion for a directed verdict. The plaintiff’s testate, an employee of an independent contractor, sustained his injuries in a fall through a portion of the roof of the defendant’s building which his employer had undertaken to repair. Roofing work is hazardous, and reasonable examination by the independent contractor or its employees would have disclosed the condition which produced the fatal injury to the plaintiff’s testate. Favereau v. Gabele, 262 Mass. 118, 119. There was no duty to warn laid upon the defendant unless the defendant had some reason, which does not appear, to consider that a warning was necessary. Cadogan v. Boston Consol. Gas Co. 290 Mass. 496, 499-500. There is no evidence of any violation of any duty owed to the plaintiff’s testate by the defendant.

Exceptions overruled.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

252 N.E.2d 219, 356 Mass. 728, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/levy-v-h-e-fletcher-co-mass-1969.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack