Roberts v. New York, New Haven, & Hartford Railroad
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Tort, for personal injuries sustained by the plaintiff through" the alleged negligence of the defendant. Trial in the Superior Court, before Hopkins, J., who ruled that the plaintiff was not entitled to recover, and directed the jury to return a verdict for the defendant; and the plaintiff alleged exceptions. The facts appear in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtHammond, J.
The plaintiff was struck by a moving train as she was .attempting to cross the tracks of the defendant at its *297station in Canton. She was intending, to take the train for Readville, and was crossing the track to the place from which she could take the train. The question is whether she was in the exercise of due care. The train which struck her came from the south, was an express train, and did not stop at the station. From the platform from which the plaintiff started there is an unobstructed view of the track to the south, for a distance of nearly 2200 feet. It' does not appear that the view…
2Cited by10 opinions
- Slattery v. New York, New Haven, & Hartford RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1909
- Fitzgerald v. Boston Elevated Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1907
- Kaminski v. FournierMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1920
- Lundergan v. New York Central & Hudson River RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1909
- Quinn v. Boston Elevated Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1905
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.