Legal Opinion

Watkins v. Boston & Maine Railroad

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Decided March 1, 1927PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMarble, J.

Section 2 of the boiler inspection act as amended by 38 U. S. Stat. 1192, c. 169, s. 1, required the defendant to furnish a locomotive and tender “in proper condition and safe to operate.” The plaintiff contends that the locomotive in question was not in proper condition because of excessive lateral play in the apron connecting the cab and tender, and because of the absence of chains across the open gangways, through which the enginemen entered and left the engine.

The construction of the apron is described at length in the first opinion. 79 N. H. 285, 286. Recovery was there denied because…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad v. GroegerSupreme Court of the United States · 1925

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Little v. HughesLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1961
  2. Ehalt v. McCarthyUtah Supreme Court · 1943
  3. Fryer v. St. Louis-San Francisco Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1933
  4. Perreault v. Allen Oil Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1935
  5. Bridges v. Great Falls Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1931

5 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