Cambria v. Jeffery
| Decision Date | 21 October 1940 |
| Citation | 29 N.E.2d 555,307 Mass. 49 |
| Parties | CAMBRIA v. JEFFERY. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Report from First District Court, Eastern Middlesex; Greenhalge, Judge.
Action by John E. Cambria against Ernest Jeffery to recover for damage to plaintiff's automobile as result of a collision with an automobile owned and operated by the defendant. The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff for $838.35, but the judge under leave reserved entered a verdict for the defendant, the reported the case.
Verdict under leave reserved set aside, and judgment on verdict returned by jury.
Argued before FIELD, C. J., and LUMMUS, DOLAN, COX, and RONAN, JJ.
Eugene C. McCabe, of Boston, for plaintiff.
Badger, Pratt, Doyle & Badger, and John J. Murphy, all of Boston (John J. Sullivan, of Boston, of counsel), for defendant.
Two automobiles, one owned by the plaintiff Cambria and operated by his servant, the other owned and operated by the defendant Jeffery, had a collision.
Jeffery brought in a district court an action of tort for alleged negligence against Cambria to recover for bodily injury and damage to Jeffery's automobile. The judge found that the collision was caused by negligence of both operators, and therefore judgment was rendered in favor of the then defendant Cambria.
Afterwards the present action of tort, for alleged negligence of Jeffery causing damage to Cambria's automobile, was tried. The jury returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiff Cambria for $838.35; but the judge under leave reserved (G.L.(Ter.Ed.) c. 231, § 120) entered a verdict for the defendant Jeffery on the ground that the earlier judgment had adjudicated that the present plaintiff Cambria through his servant was guilty of contributory negligence, and reported the case.
A fact merely found in a case becomes adjudicated only when it is shown to have been a basis of the relief, denial of relief, or other ultimate right established by the judgment. Olsen v. Olsen, 294 Mass. 507, 509, 510, 2 N.E.2d 475;Tighe v. Skillings, 297 Mass. 504, 508, 9 N.E.2d 532;Whittemore v. Selectmen of Falmouth, Mass., 22 N.E.2d 664;North Carolina Railroad v. Story, 268 U.S. 288, 294, 45 S.Ct. 531, 69 L.Ed. 959; Freeman, Judgments (5th ed. 1925) §§ 697, 698. Compare on the facts Long v. MacDougall, 273 Mass. 386, 173 N.E. 507;Browne v. Moran, 300 Mass. 107, 14 N.E.2d 119;Gilley v. Jarvis, 94 Vt. 135, 109 A. 41, and Winters v. Bisaillon, 153 Or. 509, 57 P.2d 1095, ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Attorney General v. Book Named 'Naked Lunch'
...Erie R.R. v. Tompkins and Supervening Changes in State Law, 50 Yale L.J. 315, 317, n. 14, listing Federal cases.14 See Cambria v. Jeffery, 307 Mass. 49, 50, 29 N.E.2d 555; Henchey v. Cox, 348 Mass. 742, 746--747, 205 N.E.2d 715; James, Civil Procedure (1965), §§ 11.17 and 11.18.15 'From the......
-
Petition of Dept. of Social Services to Dispense with Consent to Adoption
...between the same parties." Gidwani v. Wasserman, 373 Mass. 162, 168-169, 365 N.E.2d 827 (1977), and cases cited. See Cambria v. Jeffery, 307 Mass. 49, 29 N.E.2d 555 (1940); Restatement (Second) of Judgments § 68, and comment h (Tent. Draft No. 4, 1977).10 In her brief the mother argues, ess......
-
Boyd v. Jamaica Plain Co-op. Bank
...is essential to the judgment." Restatement (Second) of Judgments § 68 (Tent.Draft No. 4, 1977). See also Cambria v. Jeffery, 307 Mass. 49, 29 N.E.2d 555 (1940); Wayland v. Lee, 325 Mass. 637, 641, 91 N.E.2d 835 (1950); Henchey v. Cox, 348 Mass. 742, 746-747, 205 N.E.2d 715 (1965); Rudow v. ......
-
Moore v. United States
...should not be bound by the stipulation. See also Kjar v. United States, 108 Ct.Cl. 119, 69 F.Supp. 406 (1947); Cambria v. Jeffery, 307 Mass. 49, 29 N.E.2d 555 (1940). Additionally it appears to me that even if one accepts the plaintiffs' position that the finding of the exact amount of the ......