Austin v. Fitchburg Railroad
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Tort, for personal injuries sustained by the plaintiff while in the defendant’s employ as a brakeman. The declaration contained two counts; one under the employers’ liability act, St. 1887, c. 270, and the other at common law. Trial in the Superior Court, before Sherman, J., who ruled that the plaintiff could not recover, and directed the jury to return a verdict for the defendant; and the plaintiff alleged exceptions.
Read the full summary
Tort, for personal injuries sustained by the plaintiff while in the defendant’s employ as a brakeman. The declaration contained two counts; one under the employers’ liability act, St. 1887, c. 270, and the other at common law. Trial in the Superior Court, before Sherman, J., who ruled that the plaintiff could not recover, and directed the jury to return a verdict for the defendant; and the plaintiff alleged exceptions. It was agreed that, if the ruling and direction were right, judgment was to be entered for the defendant; if wrong, and the exceptions were sustained, judgment was to be…
1Opinion of the CourtMorton, J.
There are two counts in the declaration, — the first under the employers’ liability act, and the second at common law. The first count alleges that, while he was in the exercise of due care, the plaintiff “ was severely injured by a large stone improperly placed on a freight car and in a dangerous condition by. reason of the negligence of- said corporation or of some person in the service of said corporation intrusted with and exercising superintendence, whose sole and principal duty was that of superintendence.” The second count alleges that the plaintiff, being in the exercise of due care,…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Davis v. New York, New Haven, & Hartford RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1893
- Steffe v. Old Colony RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1892
- Hannah v. Connecticut River RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1891
- Fairman v. Boston & Albany RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1897
3Cited by8 opinions
- Missouri Pacific Railway Co. v. BentleySupreme Court of Kansas · 1907
- Chamberlain v. Southern Ry. Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1909
- Berry v. New York Central & Hudson River RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1909
- Smith v. Southern Pacific Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1911
- Engen v. Rambler Copper & Platium Co.Wyoming Supreme Court · 1912
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.