Furey v. Worcester & Southbridge Street Railway Co.
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Tort for personal injuries alleged to have been received by the plaintiff because, as an open electric street car of the defendant was passing her, under the circumstances stated in the opinion, the draft of air thus created caused her dress skirt to be caught upon something on the car and she was thrown down and dragged.
Read the full summary
Tort for personal injuries alleged to have been received by the plaintiff because, as an open electric street car of the defendant was passing her, under the circumstances stated in the opinion, the draft of air thus created caused her dress skirt to be caught upon something on the car and she was thrown down and dragged. Writ in the Superior Court dated September 10, 1907. The case was tried before Graskill, J. The evidence as to the speed of the car was as follows: The plaintiff on direct examination stated, “ The car was coming quite fast. I could not judge how fast it was going. I could…
1Opinion of the CourtHammond, J.
It is unnecessary to pass upon the question of the care of the plaintiff, for we are of opinion that there was no evidence of negligence on the part of the defendant. At the time of the accident the plaintiff was upon the earth sidewalk, about half way between the end of the iron fence and the driveway leading to the works of the American Optical Company. At that point the sidewalk appears to have been at least five feet wide, that is, the distance between the wooden fence upon one side of the plaintiff and the nearest rail of the defendant’s track on the other side was at least five feet.…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Selibedea v. Worcester Consolidated Street Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1916
- Leitner v. Columbia Rwy., Gas & Electric Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1928