[Download] "Roscigno v. Colonial Beacon Oil Co." by Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts # eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: Roscigno v. Colonial Beacon Oil Co.
- Author : Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts
- Release Date : January 02, 1936
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 65 KB
Description
LUMMUS, Justice. On February 10, 1928, the plaintiff sustained personal injuries from the explosion of a vaporizer tank in
the oil storage and refining plant of the defendant, more than a quarter of a mile away from the plaintiff's house. The same
explosion resulted in the case of Anderson v. Beacon Oil Co., 281 Mass. 108, 183 N.E. 152. In the case at bar, an action of tort for alleged negligence, there was no evidence of specific negligence, and the only
question is whether res ipsa loquitur. If it does, the burden of proof of negligence remains on the plaintiff (Fitzmaurice
v. Boston, Revere Beach & Lynn Railroad Co., 256 Mass. 217, 218, 152 N.E. 239; Gilchrist v. Boston Elevated Railway Co.,
272 Mass. 346, 352, 353, 172 N.E. 349), and the tribunal of fact is never required to conclude that there was negligence,
by dint of technical presumption (Brown v. Henderson, 285 Mass. 192, 189 N.E. 41) or treatment of the occurrence as prima
facie evidence within the definition of that expression in Haun v. LeGrand, 268 Mass. 582, 168 N.E. 180, and Thomes v. Meyer
Store, Inc., 268 Mass. 587, 168 N.E. 178. The rule of res ipsa loquitur merely permits the tribunal of fact, if it sees fit,
in the absence of a finding of the specific cause of the occurrence (Cook v. Newhall, 213 Mass. 392, 395 et seq., 101 N.E.
72; Gilchrist v. Boston Elevated Railway Co., 272 Mass. 346, 352, 353, 172 N.E. 349), to infer from the occurence itself that
it would not have happened unless in some respect the defendant had been negligent (Graham v. Badger, 164 Mass. 42, 47, 41
N.E. 61; Poole v. Boston & Maine Railroad, 216 Mass. 12, 17, 18, 102 N.E. 918; Gilchrist v. Boston Elevated Railway Co.,
272 Mass. 346, 352, 353, 172 N.E. 349; Sweeney v. Erving, 228 U.S. 233, 33 S.Ct. 416, 57 L.Ed. 815, Ann.Cas.1914D, 905; Glowacki
v. North Western Ohio Railway & Power Co., 116 Ohio St. 451, 157 N.E. 21, 53 A.L.R. 1486, and note. Winslow v. Tibbetts,
131 Me. 318, 322, 162 A. 785).