Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

132 Mass. 87

Morain v. Devlin

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided January 3, 1882

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · decided 1882-01-03

<p>Tort for personal injuries occasioned to the plaintiff, on May 10,1880, by a defect in a doorstep of a tenement building owned by the defendant in Lawrence.</p> <p>At the trial in the Superior Court, before Brigham, C. J., the plaintiff conceded that, since 1876, the defendant has been an insane person confined in one of the lunatic hospitals of the Commonwealth; and that in 1876 John Cheetham was duly appointed guardian of the defendant, and has ever since held the appointment and had the care and management of all the property of his ward. Cheetham was appointed guardian ad litem.</p> <p>The defendant asked the judge to instruct the jury that, upon the above facts, the action could not, as matter of law, be maintained. But the judge declined so to rule, and submitted the case to the jury under instructions not otherwise objected to by the' defendant.</p> <p>The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff; and the defendant alleged exceptions to the refusal to rule as requested.</p>

Relies on Looney v. McLean · Gorham v. Gross · Morse v. Crawford

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1882-01-03

How this case has been cited

Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently January 1962

11 state decisions

40188218901900191019201930194019501960decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Gray, C. J.

¶1By the common law, as generally stated in the books, a lunatic is civilly liable to make compensation in damages to persons injured by his acts, although, being incapable of criminal intent, he is not liable to indictment and punishment. Bac. Max. reg. 7. Weaver v. Ward, Hob. 134. 2 Rol. Ab. 547. 1 Hale P. C. 15, 16. 1 Hawk. c. 1, § 5. Bac. Ab. Idiots & Lunatics, E. Haycraft v. Creasy, 2 East, 92, 104. 1 Chit. Pl. (2d Am. ed.) 65. Morse v. Crawford, 17 Vt. 499. Cross v. Kent, 32 Md. 581. Ward v. Conatser, 4 Baxter, 64. Bullock v. Babcock, 3 Wend. 391, 393, 394. Behrens v. McKenzie, 23 Iowa, 333, 343. Lancaster Bank v. Moore, 78 Penn. St. 407, 412. See also Dickinson v. Barber, 9 Mass. 225; Brown v. Howe, 9 Gray, 84, 85.

¶2But this case does not require the affirmance of so broad a proposition. This is not an action for a wrong done by the personal act or neglect of the lunatic, but for an injury suffered by reason of the defective condition of a place, not in the exclusive occupancy and control of a tenant, upon real estate of which the lunatic himself, and not his guardian, is the owner. Harding v. Larned, 4 Allen, 426. Harding v. Weld, 128 Mass. 587, 591. The owner of real estate is liable for such a defect, although not caused by his own neglect, but by that of persons acting in his behalf or under contract with him. Looney v. McLean, 129 Mass. 33. Gorham v. Gross, 125 Mass. 232. Bartlett v. Boston Gas Light Co. 117 Mass. 533. And there is no precedent and no reason for holding that a lunatic, having the benefits, is exempt from the responsibilities of ownership of real estate. The ruling requested was therefore rightly refused.

¶3 Fxceptions overruled.

/132/mass/87 · .json · Public domain