Smith v. Boston & Maine Railroad
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Case, for negligently failing to provide the plaintiff with a reasonably safe place in which to work. At the close of the plaintiff’s evidence a nonsuit was ordered, subject to his exception. Transferred from the September term, 1904, of the superior court by Pike, J. The plaintiff was head brakeman on a freight train running from Nashua to Elmwood, through Wilton. He had been a railroad employee about twenty years, and had worked on this train nearly a year.
Read the full summary
Case, for negligently failing to provide the plaintiff with a reasonably safe place in which to work. At the close of the plaintiff’s evidence a nonsuit was ordered, subject to his exception. Transferred from the September term, 1904, of the superior court by Pike, J. The plaintiff was head brakeman on a freight train running from Nashua to Elmwood, through Wilton. He had been a railroad employee about twenty years, and had worked on this train nearly a year. November 5, 1902, his train left Nashua about ten o'clock in the forenoon and reached Wilton about one o’clock in the afternoon. As the…
1Opinion of the CourtBingham, J.
The defendants owed the plaintiff the duty of providing him a reasonably suitable road-bed over which to pass in the performance of his duties of shifting ears in the Wilton yard. English v. Amidon, 72 N. H. 301. This does not mean that they were insurers of his safety, or were required to furnish him with a road-bed that was absolutely safe. It is clear that the accident was caused by the open space beneath the track; but to entitle the plaintiff to go to the jury on the ground that the defendants failed to provide a reasonably safe place for him to work, he should have shown that the…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Hollenbeck v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1897
- Hurst v. Kansas City, Pittsburg & Gulf RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1901
- Franklin v. Winona & St. Peter RailroadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1887
- Missouri Pacific Railway Co. v. JonesCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1889
- McCann v. KennedyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1896
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Genest v. Odell Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1909
- Hatton v. New York, N. H. & H. R. Co.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1919
- Dervin v. Amoskeag Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1923
- Jutras v. Amoskeag Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1929
- Leazotte v. Jackson Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1908
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.