Hill v. Concord & Montreal Railroad
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Case, for killing the plaintiff’s horse. The court ordered a nonsuit, and the plaintiff excepted.
1Opinion of the CourtCarpenter, J.
The plaintiff’s evidence, taken in the most favorable aspect to him, tended to show that the horse escaped in the night from the plaintiff’s field into a public highway, along which it wandered a long distance from the plaintiff’s land to a railroad crossing, and, because of the lack of cattle-guards there, entered upon the defendants’ railroad track, where it was struck and killed by their locomotive engine.
“ The proprietors of every railroad shall erect and maintain a sufficient fence upon each side of their road except at the crossings of public highways; and at every such crossing they…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Felch v. Concord RailroadSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1890
- Morse v. Boston & Lowell RailroadSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1889
- Cressey v. Northern RailroadSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1880
- Giles v. Boston & Maine RailroadSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1875
3Cited by2 opinions
- Casista v. Boston & Maine RailroadSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1899
- Deming v. Boston & Maine RailroadSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1917