Connors v. Holden
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Tort, by the administratrix of the estate of James Connors, to recover for personal injuries sustained by the intestate during his lifetime while in the employ of the defendant.
Read the full summary
Tort, by the administratrix of the estate of James Connors, to recover for personal injuries sustained by the intestate during his lifetime while in the employ of the defendant. The declaration alleged “that said James Connors was employed by the defendant as a laborer to assist in repairing a building owned by the defendant; that it w'as the duty of the defendant to furnish the plaintiff’s intestate with a safe and suitable place in which to perform his work, but that the defendant, wholly regardless of her duty, negligently and carelessly put the plaintiff’s intestate to work in an unsafe…
1Opinion of the CourtKnowlton, J.
The only negligence alleged against the defendant in the plaintiff’s declaration is, that she put the plaintiff’s intestate to work in a dangerous place, knowing, or having good reason to know, that it was dangerous, and that she negligently omitted to inform him of the danger, of which he was ignorant.
The evidence utterly fails to support the allegations of the declaration. The place in which the work was done was safe and proper, and the only negligence of which there is any evidence was that of the fellow servants of the plaintiff’s intestate in their manner of doing the work in which they…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Frost v. ThompsonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1914
- Richmond Locomotive Works v. FordSupreme Court of Virginia · 1897
- Fitzgerald v. Boston & Albany RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1892
- Ridge v. Boston Elevated Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1913