Rogers v. Elliott
Massachusetts Supreme Court
15 N.E. 768 (1888)
Elliott (defendant) was a custodian and property manager at a Roman Catholic Church. As part of his duties, he rang a large bell daily. Rogers (plaintiff) was located in a house near the church and was recovering from severe sunstroke. When Elliott rang the bell one day, Rogers suffered convulsions. Rogers’ physician believed these were due to the noise from the bell, and informed Elliott of this fact. Elliot stated that he would continue to ring the bell regardless of the harm Rogers might suffer. Elliott rang the bell the next day and Rogers again suffered damage. Rogers brought suit against Elliott alleging that Elliott’s use of the church property was unlawful.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Knowlton, J.)
What to do next…
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 724,000 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
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 724,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 45,600 briefs, keyed to 983 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.