Lodge v. Congress Taxi Ass'n, Inc.

• Decision Date: 16 March 1960
• Citation: 340 Mass. 570,165 N.E.2d 94
• Parties: Rosalie LODGE v. CONGRESS TAXI ASSOCIATION, Inc. et al. 1
• Court: United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court

Page 94

165 N.E.2d 94

340 Mass. 570

Rosalie LODGE v. CONGRESS TAXI ASSOCIATION, Inc. et al. ¹

Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Suffolk.

Argued Jan. 5, 1960.

Decided March 16, 1960.

Ralph Arnoldy, Boston (Murray P. Reiser, Mattapan, with him), for plaintiff.

Philip T. Corwin, Boston (Warren G. Miller, Boston, with him), for defendants.

Before WILKINS, C. J., and WILLIAMS, COUNIHAN, WHITTEMORE, and CUTTER, JJ.

COUNIHAN, Justice.

On June 10, 1956, William Lodge and Rosalie Lodge, his wife, with their three children Gwendolyn, Karen, and Michael W., were riding on Warren Street, Roxbury, in a taxicab allegedly owned by Congress Taxi Association, Inc. (Congress), which because of the negligence of Whitney Rogavey, the alleged driver of the cab, collided with another automobile. The declaration in this action of tort against Congress and Rogavey which contained ten counts sought to recover damages for personal injuries sustained by all the occupants of the taxicab as the result of that collision. William also sought to recover consequential damages on account of injuries to his wife against both defendants.

The action was tried to a jury who returned verdicts for Rosalie against both defendants and verdicts for the defendants on all the other counts.

The action of Rosalie against both defendants comes here upon the exceptions of the defendants to the denial of the defendants' motions for directed verdicts in their favor and to rulings of the judge on the admission of evidence.

The pertinent facts on the evidence most favorable to Rosalie are that on the evening of June 10, 1956, William, his wife and children were visiting the home of his sister at 34 Edgewood Street, Roxbory. At about 9:30 P.M. he decided to return to his own home in another part of Roxbury. He found the telephone number of Congress, Hi 5-8600, in a telephone book in his sister's home and called it asking for a taxicab to pick up him and his family at 34 Edgewood Street. This evidence was admitted subject to the exception of Congress.

About five minutes later the door bell rang and he answered it. He saw a taxicab standing outside. On the side of the cab there was printed in large letters 'Congress Taxi Ass'n.' Its Massachusetts registration plate bore the number E23,797 and the taxicab was numbered 97. Adjacent to the registration plate was a hackney license medallion bearing the number 1397. A photograph of a taxicab bearing these numbers was introduced in evidence subject to the exception of the defendants. It bore the same Massachusetts registration plate and number, the same cab number and the same hackney license medallion number as the taxicab in which he and his family were riding at the time of the collision.

William and his wife and family got into this taxicab at Edgewood Street and as it went toward his house it travelled along Warren Street at about 30 miles an hour. Warren Street is about 40 feet wide and there were no automobiles parked on either side of it. At a point beyond Woodbine Street, William saw an automobile coming toward the taxicab 'more or less' in the middle of Warren Street. The automobile was 25 to 30 yards away from the taxicab when William first saw it. The cab driver 'jammed on his brakes' and came to a sudden stop. He then put the cab in reverse, and when he 'shot backwards * * * he banged' into an automobile which was in the rear of the taxicab. Rosalie was injured.

Subject to the exception of Rogavey, William testified that he got the name of the driver of the cab and its number. The name the driver gave him was Whitney Rogavey, residing at 118 West Newton Street, Boston, and the number of the cab was 97. This evidence was excluded in the action of Rosalie against Congress.

Neither of the defendants offered any evidence on the court in which Rosalie sought damages.

An employee of the police department of the city of Boston who had charge of the official records of the police department pertaining to the licensing of hackney carriages was called by Rosalie. He brought with him from the official records of the department an original application for renewals of hackney licenses filed by Congress. Subject to the exceptions of Congress he testified that included in the application for renewals filed by Congress on January 3, 1956, there appeared to be an application for a renewal of a hackney license for an automobile bearing Massachusetts registration plate number E23,797, medallion number 1397, and owned by Congress of 1890 Columbus Avenue, Roxbury. The application for a hackney license for this automobile was granted as of February 1, 1956, and expired on January 31, 1957. Subject to the exception of the defendants the original application for renewals was admitted in evidence as an exhibit. It purported to be signed by William Cohen, president of Congress. The hackney license for this taxicab was issued pursuant to St.1930, c. 392, § 4, as appearing in St.1934, c. 280, § 1, which authorizes the police commissioner to grant hackney licenses to suitable persons living in Boston. Such licenses are renewable as of right, unless, after hearing, good cause appears to refuse renewal. See Pisco v. Police Com'r of Boston, 331 Mass. 539, 540, 120 N.E.2d 643.

William went to 1890 Columbus Avenue, Roxbury, on the day after the accident and saw that it housed no other business than Congress as indicated by signs on the building. He entered the building and talked to a dispatcher who was answering radio calls.

The real issues are whether there was sufficient evidence to identify Congress as the owner of the taxicab...