Skip to main content

Commonwealth v. Hart

Citations

  • 525 N.E.2d 1345
  • 26 Mass. App. Ct. 235
  • 1988 Mass. App. LEXIS 472

How courts have described this case

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

  • “It is the status of the way, not the status of the driver, which the statute defines”
  • characteristics included “intersecting streets, general use by the public, a broad category of business visitors, and only occasional closing off [if any]” of the way
  • presence of businesses along the side of private way support its inclusion within scope of the drunk-driving statute
  • public way found despite presence of “a sign [a little bigger than a standard no parking sign which also adorned the pole] that read: ‘Private Property/Chomerics Employees and Authorized Persons Only’ ”
  • private way extension of a public road abutted by business outlets is a way to which members of the public have right of access as invitees or licensees
  • invitees or licensees in question were “[e]mployees, customers, service personnel, vendors, deliverymen, and other callers with a business purpose [who] used the private stretch of [road] to reach their destinations”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Cutter, Grant, Kass

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

13 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

8 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.