Ash v. Childs Dining Hall Co.

231 Mass. 86, 120 N.E. 396 (1918)

From our private database of 46,000+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Ash v. Childs Dining Hall Co.

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
231 Mass. 86, 120 N.E. 396 (1918)

  • Written by Sharon Feldman, JD

Facts

Flora Ash (plaintiff) ordered a piece of blueberry pie in a restaurant owned by Childs Dining Hall Company (Childs) (defendant). When Ash ate the pie, a tiny black tack in the pie injured her throat. Ash sued Childs for negligence and did not plead a cause of action in contract. The testimony at trial showed that Childs made the pie on its premises and its waitress served a piece to Ash. The restaurant manager testified that the blueberries came in wood baskets in which there were tiny flat-headed tacks and that he had been in the business for 18 years and had never before seen a tack in blueberries. There was other testimony that Childs used a high degree of care in preparing the blueberries for the pies. The jury returned a verdict for Ash. Childs filed exceptions.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Rugg, C.J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 742,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 742,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,000 briefs, keyed to 986 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 742,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,000 briefs - keyed to 986 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership