Scannal v. City of Cambridge
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Tort, for personal injuries occasioned to the plaintiff by an alleged defect in a highway in the defendant city. Trial in the Superior Court, before Mason, C. J., who ruled that the action could not be maintained, 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 CourtKnowlton, J.
This case presents two questions: first, whether there was evidence which would warrant the jury in finding the highway defective for want of a railing; and, secondly, whether the accident happened by reason of the plaintiff’s horse being beyond his control.
Portland Street, near the place of the accident, is fifty feet wide, and runs nearly north and south. The adjacent land on each side is somewhat lower than the street, and the fence on the westerly side had been taken away for a little distance, and earth dug out in the construction of the metropolitan sewer had been carried into the field…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Babson v. Inhabitants of RockportMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1869
- Murphy v. Inhabitants of GloucesterMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1870
- Puffer v. Inhabitants of OrangeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1877
- Barnes v. Inhabitants of ChicopeeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1884
- Damon v. City of BostonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1889
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Cook v. Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1898
- Mcfarlane v. Town of SullivanWisconsin Supreme Court · 1898
- Spillane v. City of FitchburgMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1900
- Town of Palm Beach v. HoveySupreme Court of Florida · 1934
- Harris v. Inhabitants of Great BarringtonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1897
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.