Sears v. Inhabitants of Dennis

105 Mass. 310
CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
DecidedOctober 15, 1870
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 105 Mass. 310 (Sears v. Inhabitants of Dennis) 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
Sears v. Inhabitants of Dennis, 105 Mass. 310 (Mass. 1870).

Opinion

Gray, J.

The liability of towns for defects in a highway is not limited to injuries suffered by reason of a traveller, or his horse or carriage, coming into immediate contact with the defect, but extends to injuries to the horse while under the immediate impulse or impetus received from the defect, or during reasonable efforts to relieve him from the position into which he has been thrown by coming into contact with the defect, or to the traveller by voluntarily leaping from the carriage, in the exercise of ordinary cara and prudence, to avoid apparently imminent danger from being brought into contact with the defect, or from impend-[313]*313mg consequences immediately resulting therefrom. Stevens v. Boxford, 10 Allen, 25. Babson v. Rockport, 101 Mass. 93. Tuttle v. Holyoke, 6 Gray, 447. Lund v. Tyngsborough, 11 Cush. 563.

In the case at bar, the evidence introduced at the trial would have warranted the jury in finding that the defect in the highway caused the fall of the horse and the breaking of the carriage, and that, while the horse was struggling to rise, and every rea sonable effort was being made to control him, the female plaintiff, in the exercise of ordinary care, and to avoid apparently imminent danger from the. position into which she had been brought by the defect, voluntarily leaped from the carriage, and in so doing suffered the injury sued for. If such were the facts, the action might be maintained. The case should therefore have been submitted to the jury. New trial ordered.

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

Related

Welsh v. Morse
64 N.E.2d 615 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1946)
McMahon v. Inhabitants of Harvard
99 N.E. 458 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1912)
Gannon v. New York, New Haven, and Hartford Railroad
52 N.E. 1075 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1899)
Cody v. New York & New England Railroad
7 L.R.A. 843 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1890)
Dutzi v. Geisel
23 Mo. App. 676 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1886)
Woolery v. Louisville, New Albany & Chicago Railway Co.
8 N.E. 226 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1886)
Flagg v. Inhabitants of Hudson
8 N.E. 42 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1886)
Williams v. Inhabitants of Leyden
119 Mass. 237 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1876)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
105 Mass. 310, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sears-v-inhabitants-of-dennis-mass-1870.