Legal Opinion

Hallinan v. Worcester Consolidated Street Railway Co.

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided October 2, 1930PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSanderson, J.

These are three actions of tort in which the plaintiffs seek to recover damages for injuries received while riding as passengers on a car of the defendant. The jury returned verdicts for the plaintiffs and thereafter, subject to exception by the plaintiffs, the trial judge directed that verdicts be entered for the defendant in accordance with leave reserved under G. L. c. 231, § 120.

The testimony tended to prove that the three plaintiffs boarded the car at the same stopping place, entering through the front vestibule, the floor of which was one step down from the level of the car floor. It…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Glennen v. Boston Elevated Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1911
  2. Work v. Boston Elevated Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1911
  3. McGann v. Boston Elevated Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1908
  4. Seidenberg v. Eastern Massachusetts Street Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1929
  5. Convery v. Eastern Massachusetts Street Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1925

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Cuddyer v. Boston Elevated Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1943
  2. Johnson v. Berkshire Street Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1935
  3. Desautels v. Massachusetts Northeastern Street Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1931
  4. Cantara v. Massachusetts Bay Transportation AuthorityMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1975
  5. Revsbech v. Boston Elevated Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1931

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API