From our private database of 33,800+ case briefs...
Tucker v. Henniker
New Hampshire Supreme Court
41 N.H. 317 (1860)
Ms. Tucker (plaintiff) was driving a horse-drawn carriage in the town of Henniker (defendant). While Tucker was driving, she was in an accident caused by a defect in the town’s road. Tucker brought suit against the town for the defect. During the trial, the jury was instructed to find Tucker contributorily negligent if she had not used the same standard of care an ordinary person like herself would have used when driving a horse-drawn carriage. The jury found for Tucker, and the town appealed.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Fowler, 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 605,000 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 605,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 33,800 briefs, keyed to 984 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.