Berry v. Howe

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• affirming the trial court's finding that an 11-year-old caddy was guilty of contributory negligence for failing to protect himself from being hit in the eye by a golf ball
• afErming the trial court’s finding that an 11-year-old caddy was guilty of contributory negligence for failing to protect himself from being hit in the eye by a golf ball
• \[A] boy of appellant's age [11] and experience presents a question of fact as to his capacity for contributory negligence.\
• “[A] boy of appellant’s age [11] and experience presents a question of fact as to his capacity for contributory negligence.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).