Smith v. Hiatt
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
109 N.E.2d 133 (1952)
- Written by Alex Hall, JD
Facts
Under Massachusetts statute, a person who wanted to bring an action for injuries caused by snow or ice on private property was required to provide written notice to the premises owner of the time, place, and cause of the injury within 30 days of the incident. Clara Smith (plaintiff) was working as a nanny at the home of the Hiatts (defendants) when she slipped on ice in the kitchen. Prior to the fall, Mrs. Hiatt was defrosting the refrigerator, and whether she dropped the ice herself or it fell from the refrigerator, she noticed that it was on the floor. Smith filed an action to recover for damages but did not provide written notice to the Hiatts within 30 days of her fall as required under the statute. The trial court issued judgment for Smith, and the Hiatts appealed to the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (the court). The court had previously held that the notice requirement applied to snow and ice of any origin and regardless of where the snow or ice was located on the property. The court had also previously held that notice was not required if injury was caused by a premises owner’s conduct in throwing ice.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Williams, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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.
