Legal Opinion

Fitzsimmons v. City of Taunton

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided November 29, 1893PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHolmes, J.

This is an action for personal injuries suffered ' by the plaintiff’s intestate in consequence of the caving in of the bank of a trench in which he was at work digging. There was some evidence that the defendant had notice of the danger, and that the deceased had not. The testimony generally was that

C. A. Beed, for the defendant. J. W. Cummings, (E. Eigginson with him,) for the plaintiff.

the proper way of meeting the danger in a trench like this was to knock down the sides; but we cannot say that the jury were not warranted in finding that it was proper to shore them up. Breen v. Field, 157…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Zeigler v. DayMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1877
  2. Breen v. FieldMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1892
  3. Connolly v. City of WalthamMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1892

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Polvere v. Hugh Nawn Contracting Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1913
  2. Laporte v. CookSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1901
  3. Simpson v. Phillipsdale Paper Mill Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1917

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API