Whitney v. Maine Central Railroad
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
On motion. Case for injuries alleged to have been received by the plaintiff on the 6th day of June, 1877. “And the plaintiff' avers that, on the sixth day of June, aforesaid, there was a certain public highway leading from south-west bend ferry, so called, to Lisbon factory village, in said county of Androscoggin, which said public highway was crossed by said railroad, occupied and controlled by said defendant corporation, at a place near the southeasterly end of the Lisbon…
Read the full summary
On motion. Case for injuries alleged to have been received by the plaintiff on the 6th day of June, 1877. “And the plaintiff' avers that, on the sixth day of June, aforesaid, there was a certain public highway leading from south-west bend ferry, so called, to Lisbon factory village, in said county of Androscoggin, which said public highway was crossed by said railroad, occupied and controlled by said defendant corporation, at a place near the southeasterly end of the Lisbon depot, so called, at said Lisbon; and the plaintiff further avers that, on said sixth day of June, he was riding over…
1Opinion of the CourtYiroin, J.
The plaintiff has the right in common with all other travelers to use the highway at all times for the purposes for which such ways are constructed. The defendant corporation alsó by force of their charter, had a right to lay their track and run their trains over and across the highway at the place where it is constructed. But they cannot both use the crossing at the same time. On the contrary, each, on approaching it, is bound to use his privilege with such reasonable precaution, prudence and actual diligence as may enable him to use it with safety to the other, approaching in like exercise…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Norton v. Eastern RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1873
- Pollock v. Eastern RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1878
- Newman v. British & North American Steamship Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1873
3Cited by14 opinions
- Parsons v. Crown Disposal Co.California Supreme Court · 1997
- Georgia Railroad & Banking Co. v. MaddoxSupreme Court of Georgia · 1902
- Lake Erie & Western Railway Co. v. JudayIndiana Court of Appeals · 1898
- Stanton v. Louisville & Nashville RailroadSupreme Court of Alabama · 1890
- Chicago & Erie Railway Co. v. CummingsIndiana Court of Appeals · 1899
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.