Bailey v. New Haven & Northampton Co.
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Tort for personal injuries occasioned to the plaintiff by hia being run over by a train of the defendants at a crossing of theil railroad and a highway.
Read the full summary
Tort for personal injuries occasioned to the plaintiff by hia being run over by a train of the defendants at a crossing of theil railroad and a highway. At the trial in the superior court, before Rockwell, J., it appeared that there was but one track on the railroad; and there was conflicting evidence as to the rate of speed at which the train was running at the time and place of the accident, as to how far one could see up the track at different distances therefrom on the highway, and whether the defendants failed to give the usual signals by. bell and whistle. The plaintiff contended that…
1Opinion of the CourtChapman, C. J.
The point in issue was whether the defendants had used due care. The duty of each party was, as stated in Shaw v. Boston Worcester Railroad Co. 8 Gray, 45, 66, to use such reasonable degree of foresight, skill, capacity and actual care and. diligence as to enable each to use the privilege of crossing “ with due regard to the safety of all others using like precautions, skill and care, and such as a person of ordinary sense, prudence and discretion would use in regard to his own affairs under like circumstances.” See also Bradley v. Boston Maine Railroad, 2 Cush. 539.
The thing sought to be…
2Cited by18 opinions
- Grand Trunk Railway Co. v. IvesSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- G., C. & Santa Fe R'y Co. v. EvansichTexas Supreme Court · 1884
- Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co. v. ClarkIndiana Court of Appeals · 1912
- Dolan v. Boott Cotton MillsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1904
- Veginan v. MorseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1893
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.