Lesan v. Maine Central Railroad
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
On exceptions and motion to set aside the verdict and for a new trial. An action to recover damages for personal injuries, and damage ito carriage, by reason of the alleged negligence of the servants of the defendant corporation in running and managing a locomotive and tender, causing a collision with the plaintiff’s carriage ;at Bridge street crossing in Belfast, February 17, 1882. The writ was dated March 15, 1882. The plea was not guilty.
Read the full summary
On exceptions and motion to set aside the verdict and for a new trial. An action to recover damages for personal injuries, and damage ito carriage, by reason of the alleged negligence of the servants of the defendant corporation in running and managing a locomotive and tender, causing a collision with the plaintiff’s carriage ;at Bridge street crossing in Belfast, February 17, 1882. The writ was dated March 15, 1882. The plea was not guilty. The verdict was for the plaintiff for one thousand one hundred eighty-one dollars and thirty-one cents. The defendant moved to set •aside the verdict and…
1Opinion of the CourtPeters, C. J.
To entitle the plaintiff to recover, he must show, first, that the defendants were guilty of negligence; the injury itself does not import negligence.
Secondly, he must show that their negligence caused the accident. There must be a visible connection of cause and effect. It is not enough to show that the defendants’ negligence was adequate and sufficient to cause it — that it might have caused it — he must show that it did cause it; that it ivas the predominating efficient cause of the accident and injury.
If the accident was caused partly by the plaintiff’s own negligence, then it was not, in…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Continental Improvement Co. v. SteadSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
- Houghkirk v. President, Managers & Co. of the Delaware & Hudson Canal Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1883
- McGrath v. New York Central & Hudson River RailroadNew York Court of Appeals · 1876
- Commonwealth v. Boston & Worcester RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1869
3Cited by9 opinions
- Heddles v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1889
- Atlantic & Danville Railway Co. v. ReigerSupreme Court of Virginia · 1897
- Barlow v. LowerySupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1948
- Josselyn v. DearbornSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1948
- Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co. v. DurandSupreme Court of Kansas · 1902
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.