Taunton v. Hoar
| Decision Date | 17 November 1934 |
| Citation | 192 N.E. 831,288 Mass. 326 |
| Parties | TAUNTON v. HOAR. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Exceptions from Superior Court, Suffolk County; Sisk, Judge.
Action of tort by Samuel Taunton against Dorothy B. Hoar. On exceptions, saved by the plaintiff at the trial in the Superior Court before the judge who ordered a verdict for defendant.
Exceptions overruled.
F. H. Harding, Jr., of Boston, for plaintiff.
K. C. Parker, of Boston, for defendant.
This is an action of tort to recover compensation for personal injuries sustained by reason of the alleged negligence of the defendant. The plaintiff was a licensed engineer. At the request of the defendant he was sent by his employer to her home and was told that the boiler gave out no heat although a fire had been built under it; it was making a rumbling noise; the defendant asked the plaintiff to look at it and see what was the matter with it. He did so, discovered that there was no water in the boiler, and so informed the defendant. He advised raking out the fire and letting the boiler cool so that water could be put in it. As he was about to draw out the fire, the boiler exploded, causing the injuries. It was the hot water boiler commonly used in heating dwelling houses.
The judge rightly directed a verdict for the defendant. There was no evidence of negligence on her part. The plaintiff went to her house to discover and remedy the trouble of which the defendant was ignorant. He was in the position of an independent contractor who made his own investigation and acted on his own judgment. Archer v. Eldredge, 204 Mass. 323, 326, 90 N. E. 525;Brogna v. Capodilupo, 279 Mass. 586, 181 N. E. 828. See Boisvert v. Ward, 199 Mass. 594, 85 N. E. 849.
Exceptions overruled.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Noble v. Greenbaum
...or on account of the carelessness of his employees he could not recover from the person for whom he was doing the work. Taunton v. Hoar, 288 Mass. 326, 192 N.E. 831;Parker v. Taylor, 295 Mass. 51, 3 N.E.2d 25;Crocker v. MacLean, 300 Mass. 255, 15 N.E.2d 237. The plaintiff, however, was an e......
-
Noble v. Greenbaum
... ... of the carelessness of his employees he could not recover ... from the person for whom he was doing the work. Taunton ... v. Hoar, 288 Mass. 326 ... Parker v. Taylor, 295 ... Mass. 51 ... Crocker v. MacLean, 300 Mass. 255 ... The plaintiff, ... ...
- Taunton v. Hoar.