Regan v. Cummings
| Decision Date | 27 November 1917 |
| Citation | 228 Mass. 414,117 N.E. 800 |
| Parties | REGAN v. CUMMINGS. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Exceptions from Superior Court, Suffolk County; William B. Stevens, Judge.
Action by John T. Regan against William J. Cummings. In the superior court, Stevens, J., directed verdict for defendant, and plaintiff excepts. Exceptions sustained.
In an action for injuries to a pedestrian, when struck by a locking ring from the wheel of automobile operated by defendant's servant, whether the servant was negligent in not stopping the car after a tire blew out in season to have prevented the release of the locking rings by the tire's becoming flat held a jury question.
The negligence of defendant's servant, driving defendant's automobile, in not stopping the car after a blow-out in time to have prevented the release of locking rings, one of which struck a pedestrian, was the direct and proximate cause of the pedestrian's injury, though the precise form in which the negligence would probably cause harm to some person could not have been foreseen.
McDonald & Graham, of Boston, for plaintiff.
Frederick J. Daggett, of Winthrop, and Jas. T. Cassidy, of Boston (Philip Mansfield, of Boston, of counsel), for defendant.
This is an action of tort to recover damages for personal injuries sustained May 28, 1914, by the plaintiff while walking on the sidewalk of a public street, by reason of being struck by a ‘locking ring’ which came from a wheel of an automobile owned by the defendant and operated by a servant of the defendant, who was at the time of the accident engaged in the business of the defendant. At the close of the evidence the presiding judge directed a verdict for the defendant and the plaintiff excepted.
[1] Making every reasonable assumption in favor of the plaintiff, Shea v. American Hide & Leather Co., 221 Mass. 282, 109 N. E. 158, the jury would have been warranted in finding that the plaintiff while in the exercise of due care was struck, and received pecuniary harm, by a locking ring of the defendant's automobile, which had rolled across the street to the sidewalk upon which the plaintiff was traveling; that the locking ring was of metal and of the circumference of an ordinary automobile wheel; that the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Desmarais v. Standard Acc. Ins. Co.
...182 N.E. 916, or when struck by some part of a vehicle which had become detached while it was being driven along the way, Regan v. Cummings, 228 Mass. 414, 117 N.E. 800; Van Steenbergen v. Barrett, 286 Mass. 400, 190 N.E. 597. The fact that the detached part was projected onto private prope......
-
Kelly v. Gagnon
... ... with the tires somewhat worn ... The ... only case found indexed under "Tires" is Regan ... v. Cummings, 228 Mass. 414, 117 N.E. 800, where the ... driver heard the air escaping from a punctured tire and was ... held negligent for not ... ...
-
Butts v. Anthis
...713. It has also been held to be negligence to drive a car "on the rim." Porter v. Hetherington (Mo. App.) 158 S.W. 409. In Regan v. Cummings (Mass.) 117 N.E. 800, the court held that it was for the jury to determine whether it was negligence to run farther than necessary after a blow-out o......
-
Band v. Reinke
...cites, as sustaining her view, Wolfe v. Marks, 277 Mich. 154, 269 N.W. 125; Crupe v. Spicuzza, Mo.App., 86 S.W.2d 347; Regan v. Cummings, 228 Mass. 414, 117 N.E. 800; Christos v. Manos, 16 La.App. 512, 134 So. 713; Carpenter v. Campbell Automobile Co., 159 Iowa 52, 140 N.W. 225; Kaufman v. ......