LIVE FREE OR DIE LEGAL
This website is not an official source of law. This website does not provide legal advice. For official legal materials, verify against the relevant court, legislature, agency, or other official source. Legal information may be incomplete, outdated, or incorrectly processed. Consult a qualified attorney for advice about a specific legal matter.

This page is an unofficial LFoD record and is not legal advice. Verify the document against the official source before relying on it.

Joseph George v. Morse & Malloy Shoe Company

January 2, 1934 - Opinion

Unanimous
Reporter

Case records

Open case page
Date Record Text Type Party PDF
January 2, 1934 Joseph George v. Morse & Malloy Shoe Company Current page Opinion Supreme Court Reporter

Hillsborough,

Jan. 2, 1934.

Joseph George v. Morse & Malloy Shoe Company.

Thorp & Branch (Mr. Branch orally), for the plaintiff.

Wyman, Starr, Booth & Wadleigh (Mr. Ralph E. Langdell orally), for the defendant.

Peaslee, C. J.

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.

Woodbury, J.

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.