Legal Opinion

Chenery v. Fitchburg Railroad

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided November 29, 1893PublishedCited by 40 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHolmes, J.

This is an action for running down the plaintiff at a point on the defendant’s track where it is crossed by a private way, along which she was travelling. The plaintiff asked for an instruction to the effect that, if people were in the habit of using the crossing and the defendant had made no objection, the plaintiff was not a trespasser, and the defendant was bound to use reasonable care to protect her. The judge refused this, but instructed the jury, in substance, that if, taking the whole condition of things into account, the physical condition of the crossing, the width of it, the extent…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Plummer v. DillMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1892
  2. Daniels v. New York & New England RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1891
  3. Holmes v. DrewMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1890
  4. Morrissey v. Eastern RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1879
  5. Stevens v. NicholsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1892

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by40 opinions

  1. United Zinc & Chemical Co. v. BrittSupreme Court of the United States · 1922
  2. McKee v. GratzSupreme Court of the United States · 1922
  3. Cederson v. Oregon Navigation Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1900
  4. Matthews v. Seaboard Air Line RailwaySupreme Court of South Carolina · 1903
  5. Roth v. Union Depot Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1896

35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API