Upson v. General Baking Co.

Decision Date04 November 1931
CitationUpson v. General Baking Co., 113 Conn. 787, 156 A. 858 (Conn. 1931)
CourtConnecticut Supreme Court
PartiesUPSON v. GENERAL BAKING CO. et al.

Appeal from Superior Court, Hartford County; Frederick M. Peasley Judge.

Action by Helen Upson against the General Baking Company and others to recover damages for personal injuries, alleged to have been caused by the negligence of one of the defendants and the heedless and reckless disregard of the rights of others by the other defendant, and tried to the jury.The court directed a verdict for the defendant the General Baking Company, and verdict and judgment were rendered for the plaintiff against the defendant Upson, from which he appealed.

No error.

William A. Bree and H. Frederick Day, both of New Haven, for appellant Upson.

Edward S. Pomeranz, S. Polk Waskowitz, and George Miske, all of Hartford, for appellee.

Argued before MALTBIE, C.J., and HAINES, HINMAN, BANKS, and AVERY JJ.

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff was riding as a gratuitous guest in an automobile owned and driven by the defendant Upson, hereafter referred to as the defendant, and sustained injuries by reason of the latter driving off the road in attempting to pass a truck owned by the defendant the General Baking Company.The jury might reasonably have found that the defendant was proceeding at a very rapid rate of speed when about 300 feet behind the truck; that at that time the truck driver put out his hand indicating a turn to the left, slowed his car, and began gradually to make a turn into a driveway: that this signal was called to the defendant's attention...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
9 cases
  • Fly v. Swink
    • United States
    • Tennessee Court of Appeals
    • 20 Diciembre 1933
    ... ... inadvertence, or an error of judgment, Upson v. General ... Baking Co., 113 Conn. 787, 789, 156 A. 858, Schepp ... v. Trotter, 115 Conn. 183, ... ...
  • Vanderkruik v. Mitchell
    • United States
    • Connecticut Supreme Court
    • 16 Julio 1934
    ... ... or his reckless disregard of the rights of others." ... General Statutes, § 1628. Interpreting the latter phrase ... in accordance with what we conceived to be ... 1, 3, 147 ... A. 263; Silver v. Silver, 108 Conn. 371, 376, 143 A ... 240, 65 A.L.R. 943; Upson v. General Baking Co., 113 ... Conn. 787, 789, 156 A. 858 ... It is ... apparent that ... ...
  • Napier v. Mooneyham
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • 24 Abril 1936
    ...110 Conn. 169, 147 A. 568; Meyer v. Hart, 110 Conn. 244, 147 A. 678; Grant v. MacLelland, 109 Conn. 517, 147 A. 138; Upson v. General Baking Co., 113 Conn. 787, 156 A. 858; Schepp v. Trotter, 115 Conn. 183, 160 A. 869; Anderson v. Colucci, 116 Conn. 67, 163 A. 610. The same statute has been......
  • Smith v. Meadows
    • United States
    • New Mexico Supreme Court
    • 7 Abril 1952
    ...244, 245, 147 A. 678, or that he was guilty of more than thoughtlessness, inadvertence, or an error of judgment, Upson v. General Baking Co., 113 Conn. 787, 789, 156 A. 858, Schepp v. Trotter, 115 Conn. 183, 185, 160 A. 869, or anything to justify an inference that he was indifferent to the......
  • Get Started for Free