Leavitt v. Boston Elevated Railway Co.
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Tort for personal injuries sustained on the morning of May 30, 1913, when the plaintiff was attempting to alight from the rear platform of a street railway car of the defendant in Suffolk Square in Malden.
Read the full summary
Tort for personal injuries sustained on the morning of May 30, 1913, when the plaintiff was attempting to alight from the rear platform of a street railway car of the defendant in Suffolk Square in Malden. Writ dated August 23, 1913. In the Superior Court the case was tried before Bell, J., who at the close of the evidence, which is described in the opinion, ruled as a matter of law that there was no evidence of negligence on the part of the defendant, and ordered a verdict for the defendant. The plaintiff alleged exceptions.
1Opinion of the CourtDe Courcy, J.
There was evidence which, if believed, would warrant the jury in finding the following facts. The car, which had come to a stop in Suffolk Square, Malden, was started while the plaintiff was alighting from the step of the rear platform, and she was thrown off and injured. It had been started by the motorman in response to a signal call to “ Come on,” given by the conductor from in front of the car where he had gone to turn a switch. This was done in violation of a rule of the defendant, which required the conductor to come back from the switch to the rear platform and to give two bells there…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Stevens v. Boston Elevated Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1904
- Coneton v. Old Colony Street Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1912
- O'Day v. Boston Elevated Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1914
- Champagne v. Boston Elevated Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1914
3Cited by2 opinions
- Nuttall v. Worcester Consolidated Street Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1916
- Pierce v. Worcester Consolidated Street Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1919