Tuttle v. Fitchburg Railroad
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Tort, by the administratrix of the estate of Joseph F. Tuttle, for causing his death. At the trial in the Superior Court, before Blodgett, J., there was evidence that the intestate was killed in the night-time by a freight train at the crossing of the defendant’s railroad by a highway at grade.
Read the full summary
Tort, by the administratrix of the estate of Joseph F. Tuttle, for causing his death. At the trial in the Superior Court, before Blodgett, J., there was evidence that the intestate was killed in the night-time by a freight train at the crossing of the defendant’s railroad by a highway at grade. On the issue whether the bell upon the locomotive engine was rung and the whistle sounded as the train approached the crossing, one Knowlton testified that the bell was not so rung nor the whistle sounded at the time of the accident. One Halpin, a brabeman upon the train, testified that, as the engine…
1Opinion of the CourtField, J.
It was not competent for the defendant to prove that its servants usually rang the bell at this crossing, and to ask the jury to infer therefrom that it was rung at the time of the accident; neither was it competent for the plaintiff to prove that the defendant’s servants often or usually omitted to ring the bell at this crossing, and to ask the jury to infer therefrom that the bell was not rung at the time of the accident. It is not a case where proof or disproof of a habit of ringing the bell was competent evidence on the main issue. The plaintiff’s counsel concedes this.
The defendant’s…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Whitney v. GrossMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1885
- Wentworth v. Eastern RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1887
- Davis v. KeyesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1873
3Cited by2 opinions
- Chicago, R. I. & G. Ry. Co. v. VinsonCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1933
- Powell v. Horne Powell v. MizellSupreme Court of Florida · 1942