Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
9 Massachusetts opinions name it 2 courts 1836–1972 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Massachusetts courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Carter v. Yardley & Co.green1 sentence1966An expert witness testified that the “air wire unit” within the gasoline tank attached to the stove had been defective, permitting the discharge of an excessive amount of fuel when the valve was manipulated according to the instructions accompanying the stove and that this defect could have caused the “explosion.” The case is within the doctrine of Carter v. Yardley & Co. Ltd. 319 Mass. 92, 98, 103 , and cases cited. | 1 | 1 |
General Investment Co. v. New York Central Railroadgreen1 sentence1942Ed.] c. 201, § 1; c.215, §3), we are of opinion that the case is within the rule stated in the Jones- case, General Investment Co. v. New York Central Railroad, 271 U. S. 228, 230, 231 , and that it is distinguishable from the Jochumsen case. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Massachusetts. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Kahler v. Town of Marshfield
green
1 sentence1972By requests for rulings the petitioner presented to the judge the sole question before us on this appeal, whether this case is within the rule of Kahler v. Marshfield, 347 Mass. 514, 517 . | 1 | 1972–1972 |
Banionis v. Lake
green
1 sentence1941Lake, 289 Mass. 146, 148 . | 1 | 1941–1941 |
Pigeon v. Massachusetts Northeastern Street Railway Co.
green
1 sentence1930In the circumstances attending the collision, the defendant contends that when the plaintiff looked to his left the trolley car must have been in plain sight and near at hand and that therefore the case is within the rule of Pigeon v. Massachusetts Northeastern Street Railway, 230 Mass. 392 , and kindred cases, cited in its brief, and that the plaintiff was careless as matter of law. | 1 | 1930–1930 |
Sundine's Case
green
1 sentence1921The case is within the principle of Sundine’s Case, 218 Mass. 1 , O’Brien's Case, 228 Mass. 380 , O’Toole’s Case, 229 Mass. 165, 167 , and Hallett’s Case, 232 Mass, 49. | 1 | 1921–1921 |
O'Brien's Case
neutral
1 sentence1921The case is within the principle of Sundine’s Case, 218 Mass. 1 , O’Brien's Case, 228 Mass. 380 , O’Toole’s Case, 229 Mass. 165, 167 , and Hallett’s Case, 232 Mass, 49. | 1 | 1921–1921 |
O'Toole's Case
green
1 sentence1921The case is within the principle of Sundine’s Case, 218 Mass. 1 , O’Brien's Case, 228 Mass. 380 , O’Toole’s Case, 229 Mass. 165, 167 , and Hallett’s Case, 232 Mass, 49. | 1 | 1921–1921 |
Anjou v. Boston Elevated Railway Co.
green
1 sentence1916The case is within the principle illustrated in Anjou v. Boston Elevated Railway, 208 Mass. 273 . | 1 | 1916–1916 |
Model Lodging House Ass'n v. City of Boston
green
1 sentence1911The case is within the principle of Butler v. Ives, 139 Mass. 202 , Atlantia National Bank v. Tavener, 130 Mass. 407 , Holmes v. Winchester, 133 Mass. 140 , Model Lodging House Association v. Boston, 114 Mass. 133 , and Degnan v. Farr, 126 Mass. 297 . | 1 | 1911–1911 |
Degnan v. Farr
green
1 sentence1911The case is within the principle of Butler v. Ives, 139 Mass. 202 , Atlantia National Bank v. Tavener, 130 Mass. 407 , Holmes v. Winchester, 133 Mass. 140 , Model Lodging House Association v. Boston, 114 Mass. 133 , and Degnan v. Farr, 126 Mass. 297 . | 1 | 1911–1911 |
Atlantic National Bank v. Tavener
green
1 sentence1911The case is within the principle of Butler v. Ives, 139 Mass. 202 , Atlantia National Bank v. Tavener, 130 Mass. 407 , Holmes v. Winchester, 133 Mass. 140 , Model Lodging House Association v. Boston, 114 Mass. 133 , and Degnan v. Farr, 126 Mass. 297 . | 1 | 1911–1911 |
Holmes v. Winchester
neutral
1 sentence1911The case is within the principle of Butler v. Ives, 139 Mass. 202 , Atlantia National Bank v. Tavener, 130 Mass. 407 , Holmes v. Winchester, 133 Mass. 140 , Model Lodging House Association v. Boston, 114 Mass. 133 , and Degnan v. Farr, 126 Mass. 297 . | 1 | 1911–1911 |
Butler v. Ives
neutral
1 sentence1911The case is within the principle of Butler v. Ives, 139 Mass. 202 , Atlantia National Bank v. Tavener, 130 Mass. 407 , Holmes v. Winchester, 133 Mass. 140 , Model Lodging House Association v. Boston, 114 Mass. 133 , and Degnan v. Farr, 126 Mass. 297 . | 1 | 1911–1911 |
Commonwealth v. Holloway
neutral
1 sentence1836The same principle was substantially decided by the state court in the same State in the case of Commonwealth v. Holloway, 2 Serg. & Rawle, 305 . | 1 | 1836–1836 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.