Walker v. Boston & Maine Railroad
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Two actions OE tort, each for a personal injury occasioned to the plaintiff’s intestate by the alleged negligence of the defendant. Trial in this court, before Ames, J., who reported the cases for the determination of the full court in substance as follows: On the day of the accident, a freight train consisting of forty-seven loaded cars, drawn by two engines, started from the defendant’s station in Boston in the direction of Andover.
Read the full summary
Two actions OE tort, each for a personal injury occasioned to the plaintiff’s intestate by the alleged negligence of the defendant. Trial in this court, before Ames, J., who reported the cases for the determination of the full court in substance as follows: On the day of the accident, a freight train consisting of forty-seven loaded cars, drawn by two engines, started from the defendant’s station in Boston in the direction of Andover. Charles C. Walker, the plaintiff’s intestate in the first case, and Carl Miller, the plaintiff’s intestate in the second case, were the engineer and fireman…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
The cause of action in each of these cases was the misplacement of a switch through the negligence of a fellow-servant of the plaintiff’s intestate. Farwell v. Boston & Worcester Railroad, 4 Met. 49. Gilman v. Eastern Railroad, 10 Allen, 233. Judgments on the verdicts.
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Barbaroux v. BarkerCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1862
3Cited by9 opinions
- Holden v. Fitchburg RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1880
- Rittenhouse v. Wilmington Street-Railway Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1897
- Rogers v. Ludlow Manufacturing Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1887
- Moody v. Hamilton Manufacturing Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1893
- Toner v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1887
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.