Halley v. Hugh Nawn, Inc.
| Citation | 356 Mass. 28,248 N.E.2d 5 |
| Parties | Evelyn R. HALLEY et al. v. HUGH NAWN, INCORPORATED, et al. |
| Decision Date | 06 May 1969 |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts |
Michael B. Latti, Boston, for plaintiffs.
Francis L. Swift, Wellesley, for Hugh Nawn, Incorporated (Ralph F. Martino, City Solicitor, for the City of Revere, with him).
Before WILKINS, C.J., and SPALDING, CUTTER, KIRK and SPIEGEL, JJ.
In this action of tort the plaintiff wife seeks to recover damages for personal injuries sustained by her when she fell into a trench excavated by the defendant Hugh Nawn, Incorporated, for the defendant New England Telephone and Telegraph Company. She also seeks to recover damages from the defendant city of Revere. The plaintiff husband seeks consequential damages. The case was tried to a jury in the Superior Court. At the conclusion of the evidence the judge allowed motions for directed verdicts filed by the defendants. The case is here on the plaintiffs' exceptions to the allowance of those motions.
We summarize the evidence most favorable to the plaintiffs. On October 19, 1964, the plaintiff Evelyn Halley (plaintiff) visited her daughter who lived at 12 School Street, Revere. She approached the dwelling from the rear, through an empty lot, and arrived at approximately 3:30 P.M. A younger daughter arrived by the same route at approximately 4:15 P.M. The two of them subsequently left at approximately 1 A.M. by the front entrance. When the plaintiff reached the bottom of the front steps she observed a trench in the middle of the sidewalk which ran parallel to the street. The trench was about two feet wide and extended to the left as far as the next dwelling and to the right for about ten feet. Directly in front of the steps, a metal plate covered the trench. Between the trench and the street, except for an opening in front of the metal plate, earth was piled three to four feet high. Toward the right, earth was piled on both sides of the trench. An automobile was parked across the opening in the earthen pile with its tires on the pile, completely blocking the opening.
The plaintiff started to cross the metal plate and saw the automobile. She saw that she could go neither forward nor to the right, so she looked to the left for a place to cross the trench. When she had taken seven or eight steps toward the left, about two feet from the edge of the trench, 'the dirt crumbled under * * * (her) right foot' and she fell into the trench, her head striking the side of the trench as she fell.
At the time of the accident the trench was 'well lighted.' The weather 'was good and it was dry.' There were 'no horses, warning signals, barriers, or blinking lights in the area where she fell, or next to or around the trench or near the metal plate.' The placement of such barriers next to and around a trench was 'customary and usual.' She did not leave by the back of the dwelling because the empty lot had high hedges and 'was full of stones, cans, bushes, twigs and everything.'
The defendant city of Revere did not file a brief with this court. See S.J.C. Rule 1:13, 351 Mass. 738. The issues argued by Hugh Nawn, Incorporated and New England Telephone and Telegraph Company are that the injured plaintiff assumed the risk and was contributorily negligent in that she left 'a place of safety' and 'voluntarily exposed herself to a...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Goldstein v. Gontarz
...case in an exceptional situation that it can be ruled as matter of law that a proponent has met this burden. Halley v. Hugh Nawn, Inc., 356 Mass. 28, 30, 248 N.E.2d 5 (1969). Joyce v. New York, N.H. and H.R.R., 301 Mass. 361, 363, 17 N.E.2d (1938). We do not think this is such a case. It is......
-
Christopher v. Father's Huddle Cafe, Inc.
...Mass. 524, 527, 281 N.E.2d 280 (1972). "We do not think that the instant case is one of those `rare' cases.'" Halley v. Hugh Nawn, Inc., 356 Mass. 28, 30 248 N.E.2D 5 (1969). The jury were free to disbelieve Baker's testimonty that Christopher joined in the fighting only after a lull — he w......
-
Strickland v. Roosevelt County Rural Elec. Co-op.
...withdrawing contributory negligence from the jury. Pancoast v. McLean, 6 Wash.App. 592, 494 P.2d 1374 (1972); Halley v. Hugh Nawn, Incorporated, 356 Mass. 28, 248 N.E.2d 5 (1969); Carroll v. Wilson, 255 S.C. 536, 180 S.E.2d 198 These are factors that ameliorate the harshness of contributory......
-
Everett v. Bucky Warren, Inc.
...from the jury and decided as matter of law, Mirick v. Galligan, 371 Mass. ---, --- F 360 N.E.2d 1045 (1977); Halley v. Hugh Nawn, Inc., 356 Mass. 28, 30, 248 N.E.2d 5 (1969); Robitaille v. Brousseau, 115 R.I. 27, 32, 339 A.2d 738 (1975), and we find no exceptional circumstances in this case......