Cook v. Union Railway
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Tort for personal injuries occasioned to the plaintiff by reason of the alleged negligence of the defendant. Answer, a general denial. At the trial in this court, before Lord, J., there was evidence tending to show the following facts; On April 21, 1876, the plaintiff was driving, in the daytime, in an ordinary express wagon, on Cambridge Street, East Cambridge, towards Old Cambridge.
Read the full summary
Tort for personal injuries occasioned to the plaintiff by reason of the alleged negligence of the defendant. Answer, a general denial. At the trial in this court, before Lord, J., there was evidence tending to show the following facts; On April 21, 1876, the plaintiff was driving, in the daytime, in an ordinary express wagon, on Cambridge Street, East Cambridge, towards Old Cambridge. He was sitting by the right hand of the wagon seat, which was securely fastened to the body of the wagon, and was driving with a taut rein, with his feet resting on a platform, in front of the wagon, built f< r…
1Opinion of the CourtSoule, J.
In driving on the highway, the plaintiff was in the exercise of an undisputed right. The defendant, which occupied a part of the highway with its tracks, was bound so to construct *61and maintain the tracks that they should not be an obstruction to public travel on the highway. In the absence of knowledge, or the means of knowledge, to the contrary, the plaintiff had a right to assume that the tracks were so constructed and maintained. There was evidence as to the manner and rate of speed at which he was driving, as to the slackening of speed when he approached the crossing of the Boston and…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Mayo v. Boston & Maine RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1870
3Cited by2 opinions
- Bunting v. Central Pacific RailroadNevada Supreme Court · 1879
- Chicago Union Traction Co. v. CaseAppellate Court of Illinois · 1906