Callahan v. Boudreau
| Decision Date | 05 February 1963 |
| Citation | 187 N.E.2d 668,345 Mass. 405 |
| Parties | Thomas F. CALLAHAN v. James E. BOUDREAU et al. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
William P. DeCarolis, Worcester, for plaintiff.
John C. Burns, Worcester, for defendants.
Before WILKINS, C. J., and SPALDING, WHITTEMORE, SPIEGEL and REARDON, JJ.
In this action of tort the judge directed a verdict for the defendants, subject to the plaintiff's exception. Exceptions were also alleged to certain exclusions of evidence by the judge having to do with the status of the plaintiff on prior visits to the home of the defendants.
There was evidence of the following. The defendants issued an express invitation to the plaintiff and his family for dinner at the defendants' home. Following dinner and while the plaintiff was 'lying upon * * * [a] couch watching television,' James Boudreau (the defendant) asked the plaintiff to 'come on up to the roof and I will show you how far I am done with my chimney.' To this request the plaintiff acceded and arrived on the roof having climbed up a trellis to which he gained access from a footstool. Thereafter, the defendant asked the plaintiff to assist him by lifting bricks upon the roof and piling them at the base of the unfinished chimney. The defendant descended to the ground by means of an open stepladder and commenced passing bricks up to the plaintiff on the roof. After approximately twenty minutes on the roof the plaintiff commenced his descent. The ladder had seemed to be 'an ordinary step ladder' when first observed by the plaintiff earlier, at which time it was in an open position directly beneath the breezeway roof. During a visit to the plaintiff in the hospital later, the defendant said to the plaintiff 'that he should have gotten rid of the ladder a long time ago as he thought somebody was going to get hurt on it.'
The plaintiff, who was, with his family, clearly only a social guest of the defendants, might have...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Brogie v. Vogel
...O'Brien v. Shea, 326 Mass. 681, 682, 96 N.E.2d 163; Pandiscio v. Bowen, 342 Mass. 435, 437, 173 N.E.2d 634; Callahan v. Boudreau, 345 Mass. 405, 406, 187 N.E.2d 668. In the circumstances, questions of fact for the jury were presented concerning (a) whether the Vogels should have taken preca......
-
Huska v. Clement
...it clearly the dominant aspect of the relationship rather than a routine incident of social or group activities.' Cf. Callahan v. Boudreau, 345 Mass. 405, 187 N.E.2d 668. In the instant case, a jury finding was warranted that the work being done by the plaintiff for the defendant was 'the d......