Case Name: Patrick Garrigan vs. Nehemiah Berry & another
Court: Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Jurisdiction: Massachusetts
Decision Date: 1866-01
Citations: 12 Allen 84
Docket Number: 
Parties: Patrick Garrigan vs. Nehemiah Berry & another.
Judges: 
Reporter: Massachusetts Reports
Volume: 94
Pages: 84–85

Head Matter:
Patrick Garrigan vs. Nehemiah Berry & another.
There being no statute regulating the manner in which persons shall drive when they met* at the junction of two streets, the rule of the common law applies, and each person nm&i use reasonable care to avoid a collision, adapted to the place and circumstances.
Tort to recover damages for a personal injury received by the plaintiff while riding on horseback along the right band side of Central Street in Lowell, from a collision with a carriage driven by the defendants’ servant, and then passing into Market Street, at right angles with Central Street.
At the trial in the superior court, before Ames, J., the plaintiff requested the court to instruct the jury as follows : 1. That thu statute provision as to the law of the road does not apply to this case, but that the parties are left to the common law for their rights. 2. That the plaintiff, being on the right hand side of Central Street, had a legal right to pass, using ordinary care, and the defendants’ servant had no right to cut the. plaintiff off from his line of travel. 3. That the defendants’ servant, in driving,across Central Street into Market Street, ought to have seen that he did not interfere with the plaintiff in the proper exercise of his right of passing.
The judge adopted the first of these propositions; he stated the second to the jury, substituting that “ the defendants’ servant was bound to use ordinary care and skill to avoid collision ” for the last clause thereof; and in place of the third, he instructed the jury that the defendants’ servant, in driving across Centra Street into Market Street, ought to have practised ordinary care and skill to avoid interfering with the plaintiff in the proper ex ercise of his rights in passing. The general instructions as to negligence and ordinary care and the obligations and rights of the parties were not in other respects excepted to; but, the verdict being for the defendants, the plaintiff alleged exceptions to he above rulings.
A. R. Brown, for the plaintiff.
W. S. Gardner, for the defendants, was not called on.

Opinion:
Bigelow, C. J.
There being no statute regulating the manner in which persons should drive when- they meet at the junction of two streets, the rule of the common law applies, and each person is to use due and reasonable care, adapted to the circumstances and place. The instructions were in conformity to this principle, and if there has been any error it has been in '¡he finding of the jury. Exceptions overruled.