Legal Opinion
Watkins v. New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Decided April 29, 1935PublishedCited by 21 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtLummtjs, J.
The plaintiff was a mechanic’s helper with six years’ experience in the employ of the defendant, which was not insured under the workmen’s compensation act. Sylvain v. Boston & Maine Railroad, 280 Mass. 503, 505. Walsh v. Boston & Maine Railroad, 284 Mass. 250, 251. Cronan v. Armitage, 285 Mass. 520, 524. He began work at three o’clock in the afternoon on the day of his injury, and had a supper period from seven until half past seven. During the supper period he was expected to remain on call for emergency work. He was working under one Gray, the foreman. He had a locker for his clothes. Just…
2Cases cited30 opinions
- Erie Railroad Company v. WinfieldSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
- Bountiful Brick Co. v. GilesSupreme Court of the United States · 1928
- Sundine's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1914
- Von Ette's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1916
- White v. E. T. Slattery Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1920
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Bellows v. Worcester Storage Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1937
- Murphy v. MiettinenMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1945
- Paul Romero Reyes v. Marine Enterprises, Inc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1974
- Adiletto v. Brockton Cut Sole Corp.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1947
- Warren's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1951
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.