Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
591 N.E.2d 184 (1992)
Blackshear (defendant) and Waters (plaintiff) were both minors. Blackshear placed a firecracker in Waters’s left sneaker and lit it. Waters sustained burn injuries when the firecracker went off. Waters and his mother filed suit against Blackshear on the theory that Blackshear acted negligently. The trial judge instructed the jury that Waters could recover only if Blackshear’s act was not intentional or purposeful and, instead, was negligent. The jury held for plaintiffs. Blackshear filed a motion for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV) on the ground that the evidence produced at trial showed that Blackshear had acted intentionally, not negligently. The trial judge granted Blackshear’s JNOV motion. Waters’s application for direct appellate review by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court was granted.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Wilkins, 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 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read 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. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 217,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 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.