On January 12, 2016 a
Order
was filed
involving a dispute between
Bielski, Jerzy R,,
and
Crocker Communications, Inc.,
Crocker, James B,
Rutter, James J,
for Torts
in the District Court of Hampshire County.
Preview
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
HAMPSHIRE, SS. HAMPSHIRE COUNTY SUPERIOR
COURT
Civil Action No. 1680CV00010
JERZY R. BIELSKI,
Plaintiff
HAMPSHIHE SUPENIOR SOURT
NOV 03 2042
Vv.
JAMES B. CROCKER and CROCKER
COMMUNICATION, INC.,
Defendants /Third-Party Plaintiffs
v.
JAMES J. RUTTER,
Third Party Defendant
SS SS SH SH SEH
THIRD-PARTY DEFEND. *S MOTION FO. Ze VERDICT”
NOW COMES the Third-Party Defendant, James J. Rutter, and moves this Honorable
Court, pursuant to Mass. R. Civ. P. Rule 50(a) for a Directed Verdict, dismissing the third-party
plaintiffs’ claim against him.
As grounds for the motion the third-party defendant, James J. Rutter, states:
1. The third-party plaintiffs complaint sets forth, claims against the third-party defendant
for negligence in the operation of his vehicle on January 14, 2013.
2. The evidence as a matter of law is insufficient to show that the third-party defendant,
James J. Rutter, was negligent or violated any duty of care owed to the third-party plaintiff
with respect to the operation of his vehicle on January 14, 2013.
3. The evidence as a matter of law is insufficient to show that any alleged negligence of the
third-party defendant was the proximate cause of the plaintiff's alleged injuries.
Document Filed Date
November 07, 2017
Case Filing Date
January 12, 2016
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Preview
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS HAMPSHIRE, SS. HAMPSHIRE COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT Civil Action No. 1680CV00010 JERZY R. BIELSKI, Plaintiff HAMPSHIHE SUPENIOR SOURT NOV 03 2042 Vv. JAMES B. CROCKER and CROCKER COMMUNICATION, INC., Defendants /Third-Party Plaintiffs v. JAMES J. RUTTER, Third Party Defendant SS SS SH SH SEH THIRD-PARTY DEFEND. *S MOTION FO. Ze VERDICT” NOW COMES the Third-Party Defendant, James J. Rutter, and moves this Honorable Court, pursuant to Mass. R. Civ. P. Rule 50(a) for a Directed Verdict, dismissing the third-party plaintiffs’ claim against him. As grounds for the motion the third-party defendant, James J. Rutter, states: 1. The third-party plaintiffs complaint sets forth, claims against the third-party defendant for negligence in the operation of his vehicle on January 14, 2013. 2. The evidence as a matter of law is insufficient to show that the third-party defendant, James J. Rutter, was negligent or violated any duty of care owed to the third-party plaintiff with respect to the operation of his vehicle on January 14, 2013. 3. The evidence as a matter of law is insufficient to show that any alleged negligence of the third-party defendant was the proximate cause of the plaintiff's alleged injuries.