Adams v. Doucet

• Decision Date: 26 April 1944
• Parties: HELEN E. ADAMS v. NEIL DOUCET.
• Court: United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court

316 Mass. 1

55 N.E.2d 4

HELEN E. ADAMS v. NEIL DOUCET.

Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Essex.

April 26, 1944

January 5, 1943.

Present: FIELD, C.

J., LUMMUS, QUA DOLAN, RONAN, & WILKINS, JJ.

Negligence, Gross Motor vehicle, Use of way.

A finding of gross negligence of the operator of an automobile was not warranted by evidence merely that, while driving at fifty miles an hour after having disregarded requests of other occupants of the automobile that he slacken speed, he unnecessarily turned into the middle of the street where there were car tracks and the pavement was wet and slippery, as he knew, whereupon the automobile overturned.

TORT. Writ in the District Court of Southern Essex dated October 30, 1940.

The case was heard by Kiely, J. In this court it was argued at the bar in January, 1943, before Field, C.J., Donahue, Lummus, Dolan & Cox, JJ., and, after the retirement of Donahue &amp Cox, JJ., was submitted on briefs to Qua, Ronan, & Wilkins, JJ.

J. Z. Doherty, for the defendant. H. J. Shaw, for the plaintiff.

LUMMUS, J. In this action by a "guest" rider in an automobile against the owner and operator of it, to recover for bodily injury resulting on September 21, 1940, from his gross negligence, the judge found that the defendant was under the influence of intoxicating liquor at the time of the injury and that the injury was due to his gross negligence. Consequently the judge found for the plaintiff. The case was reported to the Appellate Division in substance on the question whether the evidence warranted a finding for the plaintiff. The Appellate Division dismissed the report, and the defendant appealed to this court.

The evidence may be summarized as follows. In the defendant's automobile were his wife, a Mr. Davis, a Mr. Bouchard, a Miss Foster and the plaintiff. Before starting from Swampscott, Bouchard and the defendant had been together for more than an hour, and had finished a pint of liquor. The whole party went to an inn at Revere, and there the defendant had three drinks. They then went to a dance hall in Revere, where the defendant had a glass of beer. But there was no evidence that the defendant was affected by liquor, and there was evidence that he was not. Police officers who saw him and talked with him shortly after the accident testified that his condition was normal. We must put intoxication out of the case.

After eating, the party started home to...