Milk v. Middlesex Railroad
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Tort for injuries incurred through negligence of servants of the defendant corporation. Trial in the superior court, before Brigham, J., who allowed a bill of exceptions substantially as 6 allows: The plaintiff introduced evidence tending to show that he was at a house on Main Street in Charlestown, through which street the defendants have a double track for their street railroad, when one of the defendants’ cars was signalled to stop to take him as a passenger to Boston;…
Read the full summary
Tort for injuries incurred through negligence of servants of the defendant corporation. Trial in the superior court, before Brigham, J., who allowed a bill of exceptions substantially as 6 allows: The plaintiff introduced evidence tending to show that he was at a house on Main Street in Charlestown, through which street the defendants have a double track for their street railroad, when one of the defendants’ cars was signalled to stop to take him as a passenger to Boston; that it did stop, on the track furthest from the house; and that in crossing the street to reach it he was struck and…
1Opinion of the CourtFoster, J.
It is much to be regretted that the bill of exceptions is drawn with such brevity and ambiguity that counsel do not agree, and this court finds it difficult to ascertain, what was the real aspect of the cause at the trial, with reference to which the learned judge gave the instructions reported and declined to grant the prayer of the plaintiff for further instructions. The refusal to give a specific additional ruling is the only exception presented to our consideration.
The debate at the bar has been upon the true meaning and construction of the bill of exceptions. The defendants contend that…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Cook v. PerryMichigan Supreme Court · 1880
- Ghenn v. Inhabitants of ProvincetownMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1870
- Sullivan v. FugazziMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1907