Cecca v. Bucci

Decision Date07 January 1932
Citation178 N.E. 447,278 Mass. 15
PartiesDI CECCA v. BUCCI.
CourtUnited States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Appeal from First District Court, Middlesex County; H. H. Newton, Special Judge.

Action by Silvio Di Cecca against Joseph Bucci, in which there was finding for plaintiff. Report to the Appellate Division was dismissed, and defendant appeals.

Reversed, finding for plaintiff vacated, and judgment entered for defendant.W. J. Gould, of Boston, for appellant.

J. G. Ashe, of Leominster, for appellee.

FIELD, J.

This is an action of tort brought in the district court by the owner of an automobile to recover compensation for damage resulting from its being struck by an automobile owned and operated by the defendant. There was evidence that the plaintiff's automobile was stopped beside the road, that some of the occupants had gone to get gasoline, and that while the automobile was so stopped the defendant's automobile ran into the rear of it. It was admitted that there was evidence of the defendant's negligence. The defendant, however, contends that recovery is barred by the fact that the plaintiff's automobile was not registered according to law. That question was duly raised before the trial judge, who ruled against the defendant's contention and found for the plaintiff. A report to the appellate division was dismissed and the defendant appealed.

The plaintiff's automobile was not legally registered. G. L. c. 90, § 2, as amended (see St. 1928, c. 316, § 3), requires that an application for registration of an automobile state the address of the applicant. It is undisputed that this automobile was registered in the name of the plaintiff, and that the application for registration as well as the certificate of registration gave his address as ‘No. 117 Audubon Road, Brookline, Mass.’ The report states that ‘On uncontradicted evidence, the defendant proved conclusively that there is no No. 117 Audubon Road, Brookline, Mass.; that there is no Audubon Road in Brookline, Mass., and that 117 Audubon Road is in Boston, Mass. Audubon Road starts in Boston at the Brookline line, and runs into Boston.’ The statute, therefore, was not complied with, and the noncompliance was in a vital matter. Identification of the owner, which is one of the purposes of registration (see Koley v. Williams, 265 Mass. 601, 603, 164 N. E. 444;Nash v. Lang, 268 Mass. 407, 409, 167 N. E. 762), requires a correct statement of his address in respect to the municipality. The erroneous substitution of Brookline for Boston in the plaintiff's address cannot be regarded as immaterial, even though the municipalities are contiguous and the plaintiff's address in Boston was near Brookline. Compare Fine v. Kahn, 270 Mass. 557, 170 N. E. 462.

Since the plaintiff's automobile was not legally registered, the plaintiff cannot recover in this action. It appears that he was not present at the time of the accident, but, according to his testimony, he had lent his automobile to the person who was then in possession of it. Even though, as stated in the record, the plaintiff lent the automobile for that person's own purposes, he violated the statutory requirement that no person shall ‘permit’ an automobile ‘to be operated upon or to remain upon any way’ unless registered in accordance with law. G. L. c. 90, § 9, as finally amended by St. 1929, c. 180. Gould v. Elder, 219 Mass. 396, 399, 107 N. E. 59. See, also, Fulton v. Stahl, 271 Mass. 23, 26, 170 N. E. 818;Liddell v. Middlesex Motor Co. (Mass.) 175 N. E. 737. The...

To continue reading

Request your trial
31 cases
  • Doyle v. Goldberg
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
    • 1 April 1936
    ... ... 187, 103 N.E. 298; Rolli v. Converse, 227 Mass. 162, ... 165, 116 N.E. 507; Koley v. Williams, 265 Mass. 601, ... 603, 164 N.E. 444; Di Cecca v. Bucci, 278 Mass. 15, ... 16, 178 N.E. 447. Trifling inaccuracies in the statements in ... the application not affecting this statutory design do ... ...
  • Cochran v. M & M TRANSP. CO.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — First Circuit
    • 7 June 1940
    ...decedent from being found to be operating his automobile contrary to law and being an outlaw upon the highway." Again, in DiCecca v. Bucci, 278 Mass. 15, 178 N.E. 447, it appeared that the plaintiff's automobile, at the time of the collision, was stopped beside the road while some of the oc......
  • In re Cahill
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
    • 28 October 1936
    ...that he was ‘operating’ the automobile need not be decided. See, however, Cook v. Crowell, 273 Mass. 356, 173 N.E. 587;Di Cecca v. Bucci, 278 Mass. 15, 178 N.E. 447. It could have been found also that the journey from which the employee was returning to his home when he received the injury ......
  • Cahill's Case
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
    • 28 October 1936
    ... ... the automobile need not be decided. See, however, ... [295 Mass. 542] ... Cook v. Crowell, 273 Mass. 356, 173 N.E. 587; Di ... Cecca v. Bucci, 278 Mass. 15, 178 N.E. 447. It could ... have been found also that the journey from which the employee ... was returning to his home when ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT