Wells v. Ballou

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Wells v. Ballou

87 N.E. 576, 201 Mass. 244, 1909 Mass. LEXIS 715

CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

DecidedFebruary 26, 1909

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 87 N.E. 576 (Wells v. Ballou) 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

Wells v. Ballou, 87 N.E. 576, 201 Mass. 244, 1909 Mass. LEXIS 715 (Mass. 1909).

Pincite

Opinion

Hammond, J.

The only question raised by the defendant, is whether there was evidence of the negligence of the defendant.The evidence as to the condition of the coal hole at the time of the letting, and from then until the time of the accident, was conflicting, and a finding favorable to the defendant on the matter might reasonably have been expected. Upon a careful study of it, however, we are of opinion that the jury properly might have found that at the time of the letting the coal hole was dangerous by reason of the liability of the cover to slip, that the means subsequently adopted to fasten the cover were not sufficiently effective, and that therefore the coal hole continued to be in a dangerous condition,, up to the time of the accident. They might have found further that by the exercise of reasonable diligence this condition of the "hole would have been known to the defendant, and that the defendant did not use such diligence. Upon such findings the plaintiff made out her case as to the negligence of the defendant. Dalay v. Savage, 145 Mass. 38. Hill v. Hayes, 199 Mass. 411.

Exceptions overruled. •

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

Hammond, J.

The only question raised by the defendant, is whether there was evidence of the negligence of the defendant.The evidence as to the condition of the coal hole at the time of the letting, and from then until the time of the accident, was conflicting, and a finding favorable to the defendant on the matter might reasonably have been expected. Upon a careful study of it, however, we are of opinion that the jury properly might have found that at the time of the letting the coal hole was dangerous by reason of the liability of the cover to slip, that the means subsequently adopted to fasten the cover were not sufficiently effective, and that therefore the coal hole continued to be in a dangerous condition,, up to the time of the accident. They might have found further that by the exercise of reasonable diligence this condition of the "hole would have been known to the defendant, and that the defendant did not use such diligence. Upon such findings the plaintiff made out her case as to the negligence of the defendant. Dalay v. Savage, 145 Mass. 38. Hill v. Hayes, 199 Mass. 411.

Exceptions overruled. •

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

87 N.E. 576, 201 Mass. 244, 1909 Mass. LEXIS 715, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wells-v-ballou-mass-1909.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack