Case ID: conn_107/html/0735-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Mary A. Saunders vs. Isaac E. Pierce et als.
    First Judicial District, Hartford,
    October Term, 1927.
    Wheeler, C, J., Maltbie, Haines, Hinman and Banks, Js.
    Argued October 6th, 1927
    decided January 6th, 1928.
    Action to recover damages for personal injuries, alleged to have been caused by the negligence of the defendants, brought to the Superior Court in Hartford County and tried to the jury before Dickenson, J.; verdict and judgment for the plaintiff for $1,750, and appeal by the defendants.
    
      No error.
    
    
      Joseph F. Berry, with whom, on the brief, were Joseph P. O’Cormell and Cyril Coleman, for the appellants (defendants).
    
      Donald Caffney, with whom was Josiah H. Peck, for the appellee (plaintiff).
   Per Curiam.

The plaintiff was injured while operating an amusement device, known as the Custer ear, a small four wheeled device resembling a miniature automobile propelled by electricity, in defendants’ amusement park. The defendants were bound to exercise reasonable care in seeing that this device was reasonably safe for those riding in and operating the car, and also in giving all of those, not familiar with its operation, adequate instruction in the method of operating and steering the car.

The jury might reasonably have found that the failure of the defendants to exercise such reasonable care was due to either or both of these causes, and that the accident was one which the defendants might reasonably have anticipated. Turgeon v. Connecticut Co., 84 Conn. 537, 542, 80 Atl. 714.

There is no error.