Page v. Inhabitants of Weymouth
This text of 93 N.E. 644 (Page v. Inhabitants of Weymouth) 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.
Opinion
There is nothing in this case that calls • for the consideration of any but very familiar rules of law, and the facts are simple. The jury properly might find that there was a defect in the earth sidewalk on a much travelled street, which was in the form of a hole or gully, caused by a flow of water across the walk; that this defect had existed there for a long time; and that the authorities of the town knew it, or would have known it if they had exercised due care.
It was a question for the jury whether the plaintiff, at the time of the accident, was using due care. The fact that she had passed over the hole before and knew of its existence does not, as a matter of law, preclude her from recovering. Winship v. Boston, 201 Mass. 273. Campbell v. Boston, 189 Mass. 7. Greorge v. Haverhill, 110 Mass. 506.
Exceptions overruled.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
93 N.E. 644, 207 Mass. 325, 1911 Mass. LEXIS 687, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/page-v-inhabitants-of-weymouth-mass-1911.