Smith v. Boston & Maine Railroad
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
1Opinion of the Court
The defendant contends that the evidence adduced at this trial differs from that before the court at the previous transfer in that it now definitely appears that the tracks between Rockingham Junction and Newfields had been rock ballasted a few months prior to the accident, and that thereafter, due to the difficulty in walking upon such ballast, the right of way had not been used by pedestrians generally but only by casual trespassers. As a consequence of this evidence the defendant argues that it was under no obligation to anticipate trespassers upon its right of way during the evening of…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Tullgren v. Amoskeag Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1926
- Minot v. Boston & Maine RailroadSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1907
- Jones v. StoneSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1917
- Richards v. RichardsSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1933
- Small v. Boston & Maine RailroadSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1934
3Cited by7 opinions
- Petriello v. KalmanSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1990
- Putnam v. BowmanSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1937
- Bowdler v. St. Johnsbury Trucking Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1939
- Lynch v. L. B. Sprague, Inc.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1949
- Jackson v. SmartSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1939
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.