Hatt v. Nay
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Tort for personal injuries occasioned to the plaintiff while at work with a pile-driver in the defendant’s employ. At the trial in the Superior Court, before Thompson, J., the jury returned a verdict for the defendant; and the plaintiff alleged exceptions, which appear in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtDevens, J.
The plaintiff, while in the defendant’s employ, was injured through the alleged negligence of the defendant’s foreman. He was permitted to put in evidence that the foreman’s reputation for competency was bad. As the defendant was bound to use due care, both in procuring and retaining a suitable person as the foreman in his employ, this evidence was properly admissible. The plaintiff desired further to put in testimony as to certain specific acts of carelessness on the part of the foreman, while engaged on the same job, and before the accident happened. This was properly excluded. Because a…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Coombs v. New Bedford Cordage Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1869
- Sullivan v. India Manufacturing Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1873
- Davis v. Detroit & Milwaukee Rail RoadMichigan Supreme Court · 1870
- Leary v. Boston & Albany RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1885
- Osborne v. MorganMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1881
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by33 opinions
- Aiken v. Holyoke Street Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1903
- Indianapolis & St. Louis Railway Co v. WatsonIndiana Supreme Court · 1888
- Western Stone Co. v. WhalenIllinois Supreme Court · 1894
- Southern Pac. Co. v. HetzerCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1905
- Brownhill v. KivlinMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1944
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.