Dziokonski v. Babineau
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
380 N.E.2d 1295 (1978)
- Written by Serena Lipski, JD
Facts
Norma Dziokonski was crossing the road after getting off a school bus when she was hit by a vehicle owned and operated by Ola Babineau (defendant). Norma’s mother, Lorraine Dziokonski, who lived in the immediate vicinity, went to the scene of the accident and saw her daughter lying injured on the ground. Lorraine rode with her daughter in the ambulance to the hospital, and Lorraine died while in the ambulance. The administrator of Lorraine’s estate (plaintiff) sued Babineau as well as the owner of the school bus, Walter Pelletier (defendant), and the operator of the school bus, Sylvester Kroll (defendant), alleging wrongful death and conscious suffering. The administrator alleged that the emotional shock, distress, and anguish that Lorraine felt due to her daughter’s injuries caused her death. Norma’s father, Anthony Dziokonski, also died following Lorraine’s death, and the administrator of Anthony’s estate also sued Babineau, Pelletier, and Kroll for wrongful death and conscious suffering, alleging that Anthony suffered an aggravated gastric ulcer, coronary occlusion, physical and emotional shock, distress, and anguish because of Norma’s injuries and Lorraine’s death. Babineau, Pelletier, and Kroll moved to dismiss both complaints, and the court granted the motion.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Wilkins, J.)
Dissent (Quirico, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 810,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.