Gleason v. Worcester Consolidated Street Railway Co.
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Tort for the death of the plaintiff’s intestate from being run •over by a car of the defendant. Writ dated December 18, 1901. At the trial in the Superior Court Sheldon, J. at the close of -the plaintiff’s evidence ordered a verdict for the defendant. The plaintiff alleged exceptions.
1Opinion of the Court
Barker, J..
The action is for damages for causing the death of the plaintiff’s intestate who was struck and killed by one of the defendant’s -ears. As he was not a passenger, even if the defendant was guilty of negligence, or the defendant’s servants were guilty of gross negligence in causing the death, the plaintiff cannot recover without affirmative evidence sufficient to justify a .finding that her intestate was in the exercise of ordinary care. *291If from the evidence the inference that he exercised ordinary-care can be only conjectural the question ought not to be submitted to a jury.…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Creamer v. West End Street Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1892
- Mathes v. Lowell, Lawrence & Haverhill Street RailwayMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1901
- Kelly v. Wakefield & Stoneham Street Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1900
- Hurley v. West End Street Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1902
- Cox v. South Shore & Boston Street Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1903
3Cited by11 opinions
- Beale v. Old Colony Street Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1907
- Thomas v. Boston Elevated Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1907
- Finnick v. Boston & Northern Street Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1906
- Carney v. Boston Elevated Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1914
- Plympton v. Boston Elevated Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1914
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.