58 N.E.2d 754 (Mass. 1945)
Plaintiff was forced for the road by a bus and she collided with a parked car. She brought an action against defendant who operated the local bus line that had a route on that street. The lower court directed a verdict in the defendant's favor.
- The Court affirmed the directed verdict.
- The Court noted that while defendant had the sole franchise for operating a bus line on the involved street, it did not preclude private or chartered buses from using the street.
- Someone could have operated the bus in question other than the defendant.
- The court held that the most that could have been said of the evidence presented was that perhaps the mathematical chances somewhat favor the proposition that a bus of the defendant caused the accident.
- The Court held that was not enough.
The court affirmed the directed verdict in defendant's favor holding that plaintiff had not proven by a preponderance of the evidence that defendant owned the bus.
Suggested law school study materials
Shop Amazon for the best prices on Law School Course Materials.