Legg v. Bloom
| Decision Date | 28 March 1933 |
| Citation | 282 Mass. 303,184 N.E. 832 |
| Parties | LEGG v. BLOOM (two cases). |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Report from Superior Court, Barnstable County; Joseph Walsh, Judge.
Action by Grace D. Legg against Hulda Bloom, and by Grace D. Legg, administratrix, substituted on the death of her husband, against Hulda Bloom, in which verdicts were directed for defendant. On report.
Judgment directed for plaintiff in each case.J. P. Sylvia, Jr., and R. Clayton, both of Boston, for plaintiff.
F. E. Smith, of Taunton, for defendant.
The first action is brought to recover for personal injuries received by the plaintiff by reason of the alleged negligent operation of an automobile, which, it is agreed was owned and operated by the defendant. The second action was originally brought by the husband of the plaintiff in the first action to recover consequential damages resulting from the injuries sustained by his wife. Grace D. Legg will hereafter be referred to as the plaintiff. At the close of the evidence submitted by the plaintiff the trial judge, on written motions presented by the defendant, directed a verdict for the defendant in each case, subject to the plaintiff's exceptions. The cases are before this court on a report.
The plaintiff on direct examination testified in substance as follows: On September 12, 1930, she lived on the southerly side of South street, Hyannis, in this commonwealth. At about half past five o'clock of that day she left her place of employment and walked along the northerly sidewalk on South street, and then crossed practically in front of her house. At that place a new curbing was being put in, cement was being poured, and a part of the work had been completed. Not knowing where she should step across, she put her foot on the cement very lightly to see if she could cross, and that is all she remembered until she woke up in the hospital. She testified in cross-examipation that the street upon which she lived was not burdened with a large amount of traffic; that automobiles pass up and down frequently and at times at rapid speed; that as she came along the northerly sidewalk she saw no traffic of any kind in the street; that when she reached a point near her house she turned to the right, and at that time she looked up and down the street and saw no automobiles immediately in the vicinity; that the street in front of her house was about thirty feet wide; that she crossed the street diagonally; that she did not see the automobile that struck her; that there was a slight hill there and if the automobile was below the rise, it could not be seen very well, in fact she did not believe it could be seen at all. On redirect examination she testified that after she had reached the right-hand side of the street she was looking for a place to step onto the sidewalk, and that was when she put her foot down on the cement to see if she could cross over to the southerly sidewalk. She further testified that when she reached the southerly side of the street and was about to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Pochi v. Brett
...v. Pierce Motor Co., 307 Mass. 535, 537, 30 N.E.2d 684. The driver of the automobile could have been found to be negligent. Legg v. Bloom, 282 Mass. 303, 184 N.E. 832;Noyes v. Whiting 289 Mass. 270, 194 N.E. 93;Perricotti v. Andelman, 298 Mass. 461, 11 N.E.2d 580; Stinson v. Soble, 301 Mass......
-
Morgan v. Lalumiere
...glancing in the direction of the car as she proceeded across, raises an issue of negligence for a jury. See, e.g., Legg v. Bloom, 282 Mass. 303, 304-305, 184 N.E. 832 (1933); Campbell v. Cairns, 302 Mass. 584, 586, 20 N.E.2d 427 (1939); Hebert v. Massachusetts Bay Transp. Authy., 1 Mass.App......
-
Campbell v. Cairns
...389, 180 N.E. 118;McSorley v. Risdon, 278 Mass. 415, 416, 180 N.E. 145;Wall v. King, 280 Mass. 577, 579, 182 N.E. 855;Legg v. Bloom, 282 Mass. 303, 305, 184 N.E. 832;Hall v. Shain, 291 Mass. 506, 508, 197 N.E. 437. The burden of proving that the plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligen......
-
Levin v. Twin Tanners, Inc.
...down Pierpont Street would exercise the care demanded by visible conditions. Spain v. Oikemus, 278 Mass. 544, 180 N.E. 314;Legg v. Bloom, 282 Mass. 303, 305, 184 N.E. 832;Byrne v. Dunn, 296 Mass. 184, 5 N.E.2d 10;Campbell v. Cairns, 302 Mass. 584, 58620 N.E.2d 427;Nicholson v. Babb, 304 Mas......