Carroll v. Bouley
| Citation | 156 N.E.2d 687,338 Mass. 625 |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts |
| Decision Date | 05 March 1959 |
| Parties | Ethel CARROLL v. Laurent R. BOULEY, Administrator. |
H. William Radovsky, Boston, for plaintiff.
Gerald P. Walsh, New Bedford, for defendant.
Before WILKINS, C. J., and RONAN, SPALDING, WILLIAMS, WHITTEMORE, COUNIHAN and CUTTER, JJ.
This is an action of tort for injuries received by the plaintiff on September 5, 1956, when the automobile in which she was riding in Fall River was struck by an automobile owned and operated by the defendant's intestate, Lawrence J. Bouley. At the close of the evidence the judge directed a verdict for the defendant subject to the plaintiff's exception.
We state the evidence most favorable to the plaintiff. It was 7:30 A.M. on a clear, dry day, and the plaintiff was seated in the front seat of an automobile, operated by her husband, which was stopped in a line of traffic awaiting a green light. The automobile was third in line headed north on the east side of South Main Street about 50 feet south of the intersection of South Main and Globe streets. The intersection is in a thickly settled business area. North of the intersection South Main Street is straight and level for 200 to 300 yards. Another street, Broadway, enters the intersection obliquely from the northwest.
Southbound traffic was governed by a signal light at the southwest corner of Globe and South Main streets. When the automobile in which the plaintiff was riding had been stopped for about a minute, she saw an automobile coming through the intersection from north to south on the west side of South Main Street and headed toward the signal light. The plaintiff 'did not observe anyone in the driver's seat of the Bouley car before it hit the post.' That automobile 'struck the red light,' broke it off at the base, and carrying it across the street at 35 miles an hour, struck the standing automobile in which the plaintiff was riding, and pushed it sideways about 5 feet against the curb.
Five minutes later, when a police officer arrived, the defendant's intestate was found lying on the automobile floor with his head 'toward the passenger side' of the front seat and his body on its right side behind the steering wheel column. He was alone, and alive and conscious, but did not talk. He was breathing heavily and gasping for breath. His face was very gray and ashen. He was taken to a hospital, but was dead on arrival about thirty minutes after the accident. Before reaching the intersection Bouley was operating along Broadway or South Main Street.
Subject to the plaintiff's general exception, which she does not argue before us, the defendant introduced in evidence a death certificate of the city of Fall River, which showed that Bouley was sixty-five years of age, and that the cause of death was 'Heart disease presumably Acute Myocatidial [sic] Infarction ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Kendall v. Schedin
...in the particular circumstances. Bash v. Clark Univ., 22 Mass. L. Rep. 84, *8 (Mass. Super. Ct. 2006); citing Carroll v. Bouley, 338 Mass. 625, 627, 156 N.E.2d 687 (1959). In general, a person does not owe others a duty of care from conditions they have not caused. Cremins v. Clancy, 415 Ma......
-
Deason v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.
...System, 65 Wash.2d 461, 398 P.2d 14, 401 P.2d 350; Shirks Motor Express v. Oxenham, 204 Md. 626, 106 A.2d 46; Carroll v . Bouley, 338 Mass. 625, 156 N.E.2d 687, (1959); Dickinson v. Koenig, 242 Miss. 17, 133 So.2d 721, (1961); Reece v. Reed, 326 S.W.2d 67, (Mo.1959); Savard v. Randall, 103 ......
-
Scott v. Thompson
...to exercise under the particular circumstances.' Altman v. Aronson, 231 Mass. 588, 591, 121 N.E. 505, 506 (1919); Carroll v. Bouley, 338 Mass. 625, 627, 156 N.E.2d 687 (1959); Beaver v. Costin, 352 Mass. 624, 626, 227 N.E.2d 344 (1967). See Prosser, Torts § 30 (4th ed. 1971); Restatement (S......
-
Gioia v. Ratner
...... . [2]" Code Gray" is a call for. assistance from security and other personnel. . . [3]The plaintiff cites Carroll v. Bouley, 338 Mass. 625, 156 N.E.2d 687 (1959), in which. the Court reversed a directed verdict for the defendant. holding that in ......