Wilson v. Norumbega Park Co.

• Decision Date: 01 June 1931
• Citation: 275 Mass. 422,176 N.E. 514
• Parties: WILSON v. NORUMBEGA PARK CO.
• Court: United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court

275 Mass. 422

176 N.E. 514

WILSON

v.NORUMBEGA PARK CO.

Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Middlesex.

June 1, 1931.

Exceptions from Superior Court, Middlesex County; Raoul H. Beaudreau, Judge.

Action by Hallie V. Wilson against the Norumbega Park Company. Verdict for plaintiff, and defendant brings exceptions.

Exceptions overruled.

J. S. McCann, of Boston, for plaintiff.

P. F. Drew, of Boston, and J. Harvey, of Belmont, for defendant.

SANDERSON, J.

This is an action of tort for personal injuries alleged to have been caused by negligence of the defendant, which owns and operates an open air amusement park containing about twenty-five acres and located on the Charles River, in Newton. It provides for the entertainment of the public numerous attractions, including a zoo, athletic field, music, sporting, recreational and picnicing facilities, and it advertises these attractions recommending the park as a desirable place for women and children. On the day of the plaintiff's injury about nine thousand people visited the park. The defendant, for a consideration, permitted John S. Paine to carry on within the park the business of selling rides on ponies to children, and designated as the place for the rides a gravel footpath, about ten feet wide which runs along a narrow peninsula and then around a small body of land known as the ‘island,’ and which was also used by patrons as a promenade. The ponies, about twelve in number, were kept in an enclosure or tied to a fence near the path, and patrons hiring them would ride upon them across the neck of land, around the island and back to the starting point. The plaintiff, taking her six-year-old child with her, paid admission to the park and went to the starting point and hired a pony. The child was placed upon the pony's back and an attendant furnished by Paine led it on the designated path, the plaintiff walking for a part of the way beside it. They went around the island, and as they were returning the boy leading the pony, contrary to the plaintiff's instructions, got ahead of her. At this time boys were racing larger ponies on this pathway ‘trying to get as much out’ of them as they could. Some of the boys would make a noise to start the ponies, and others were driving them. One of the ponies driven by a boy twelve or fourteen years of age ran into the plaintiff from behind, while she was on the path, and knocked her down, causing the injury complained of. There was no evidence of vicious habits of any of the ponies.

The manager of the defendant testified that if he thought persons receiving concessions were not conducting their business properly he would tell them what they should do, and that he tried to take every precaution to prevent ponies unattended from galloping down the paths where people walked. A witness called by the plaintiff testified that after the accident she heard the manager of the defendant say to the son of the owner of the ponies, ‘How many times have I told you not to let those boys ride on those ponies unattended?’ There was evidence that at times before the accident the larger children had been seen riding ponies unattended.

[1] The defendant's exceptions to evidence have not been argued and are treated as waived.

[5] The owner owes a duty to those coming upon his premises by his invitation to use care to see that the premises are kept in a reasonably safe condition for the purposes for which they are arranged. Blanchette v. Union Street Railway, 248 Mass. 407, 412,143 N. E. 10;Cruickshank v. Brockton Agricultural Society, 260 Mass. 283, 284, 157 N. E. 357;Bottcher v. Buck, 265 Mass. 4, 6, ...