History
  • No items yet
midpage
George v. Morse & Malloy Shoe Co.
170 A. 776
| N.H. | 1934
|
Check Treatment

Lead Opinion

The case is governed by Thomson v. Company, ante, 436, decided this day.

In so far as the facts differ from those in the earlier case, they are not more favorable to the plaintiff.

Exception overruled.

BRANCH, J., did not sit: WOODBURY, J., concurred in the result: the others concurred.






Concurrence Opinion

I concur in the result upon the ground that the injury was foreseen, anticipated and not accidental. In so far as the doctrine upon which this case is disposed of is concerned I dissent for the reasons set forth in the dissenting opinion in Thomson v. Company. *Page 597

Case Details

Case Name: George v. Morse & Malloy Shoe Co.
Court Name: Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Date Published: Jan 2, 1934
Citation: 170 A. 776
Court Abbreviation: N.H.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.