Disclaimer
|
|
|
|
|
| Frazel v. Boston Edison Company, 183 NE 2d 115, 34 Mass 759 (Mass 1962). The details on this case are very sketchy; all it really said was that a minor bicyclist was struck by a truck. The trial judge found for the plaintiffs, and the Appellate Division vacated the judgment and ordered a finding for the defendants. The Supreme Judicial Court affirmed the Appellate order. "For the reasons set forth in the opinion of the Appellate Division there was no error. There it was said, 'If we disregard the defendants' evidence, the only evidence we have left bearing on the [individual] defendant's operation of the truck is that it passed the [minor] plaintiff within the 'width of arms.' This is virtually the plaintiffs' entire version of how the accident happened. No claim is made that the [corporate] defendant's truck struck the [minor] plaintiff before he lost control of his bicycle, and, except for the fact that the [minor] plaintiff was thrown from his bicycle and injured, there is no evidence with respect to just what happened after he lost control. In our opinion the evidence did not warrant a finding that the [individual] defendant was negligent.'" | ||||
| Home Disclaimer |
||||