Nappi v. Grand Trunk Railway Co.
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Cask, for negligence. Trial by jury. At the close of all the evidence the defendants’ motion that the court direct a verdict for the defendants was granted, subject to the plaintiff’s exception.
Read the full summary
Cask, for negligence. Trial by jury. At the close of all the evidence the defendants’ motion that the court direct a verdict for the defendants was granted, subject to the plaintiff’s exception. Transferred from the December term, 1915, of the superior court, by Chamberlin, J. The plaintiff’s intestate was his four year old son, who, on May 6, 1915, was run over and killed by a freight car of the defendants on the Longfield siding in the east yard at Gorham, N. H. The plaintiff’s intestate lived with his parents in Gorham, and the Nappi house fronted on the south side of the right of way of…
1Opinion of the CourtPlummer, J.
The plaintiff claims that under the statute the defendants were bound to erect and maintain a fence between their right of way and the adjoining land occupied by him and his intestate, sufficient to prevent the intestate from going upon the railroad tracks, and that the failure of the defendants to provide such a fence made them guilty of negligence, and liable in this action.
This raises the question whether railroads in this state must provide fences by the side of their rights of way that will prevent persons from going upon the railroad tracks. The first act passed by the legislature…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Nolan v. New York, New Haven & Hartford RailroadSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1885
- Menut v. Boston & Maine RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1910
- Baltimore & Ohio Southwestern Railway Co. v. BradfordIndiana Court of Appeals · 1898
- Bischof v. Illinois Southern Railway Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1908
3Cited by2 opinions
- Smith v. Boston & Maine RailroadSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1935
- Goy Ex Rel. Goy v. Director General of RailroadsSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1920