Mathieu v. Springfield Street Railway Co.
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
1Opinion of the CourtSpalding, J.
The sole question here is whether the evidence would warrant a finding of negligence on the part of the defendant. The declaration contains two counts. In one the female plaintiff seeks to recover damages for personal injuries; in the other her husband seeks consequential damages. The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff on each count. The defendant’s exception to the denial of its motion for a directed verdict on each count brings the case here. For convenience the female plaintiff will hereinafter be called the plaintiff.1
There was evidence that the plaintiff boarded the defendant’s…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Work v. Boston Elevated Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1911
- McGann v. Boston Elevated Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1908
- Carson v. Boston Elevated Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1941
- Cuddyer v. Boston Elevated Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1943
- Anderson v. Boston Elevated Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1914
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Spiller v. Metropolitan Transit AuthorityMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1965
- Berger v. Massachusetts Bay Transportation AuthorityMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1969
- Cantara v. Massachusetts Bay Transportation AuthorityMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1975
- Klenk v. Capital Transit CompanyDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1958
- Gelineau v. Massachusetts Bay Transportation AuthorityMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1973
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.