Shepard v. Roussel

• Court: Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts
• Writing for the Court: Before WILKINS
• Citation: Shepard v. Roussel, 170 N.E.2d 317, 341 Mass. 730 (Mass. 1960)
• Decision Date: 03 November 1960
• Parties: Ella SHEPARD et al. v. Georges E. ROUSSEL.

Page 317

170 N.E.2d 317

341 Mass. 730

Ella SHEPARD et al. v. Georges E. ROUSSEL.

Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Worcester.

Argued Sept. 26, 1960.

Decided Nov. 3, 1960.

John J. O'Connell, Worcester, for plaintiffs.

Francis H. George, Worcester, for defendant.

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

RESCRIPT.

Mrs. Shepard was injured when the defendant's automobile in which she was riding ran into the rear end of another automobile demolishing its trunk and gasoline tank and perhaps splitting its chassis. Her husband seeks consequential damages. Verdicts for the defendant under leave reserved were entered after the jury returned verdicts for the plaintiffs. We assume without deciding that Mrs. Shepard was not engaged in a common employment with the defendant but was his guest who could recover from him if she proved his gross negligence. See Motta v. Mello, 338 Mass. 170, 172, 154 N.E.2d 364. It could have been found that the defendant had been drinking, seemed 'in a fog,' and failed to heed warnings to stop just before the collision. The accident, however, occurred on a private driveway only a short distance from the point where Mrs. Shepard had entered the automobile and a brief time after the automobile had started to move. Mrs. Shepard estimated that the defendant's speed had become 'a little higher than thirty-five miles per hour at the time of impact.' The aggregate of any negligent acts on the defendant's part could not be found to involve such an 'aggravated degree of culpability' (see Bagley v. Burkholder, 337 Mass. 246, 248, 149 N.E.2d 143, 145) or to have been so long continued, serious, deliberate, and persistent as to constitute gross negligence. See Lynch v....