Legal Opinion
Ogden v. Aspinwall
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Decided January 7, 1915PublishedCited by 45 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtLoring, J.
The facts out of which this action arose were, or could have been found by the jury to have been, in substance as follows: The plaintiff was an employee of a tenant of the defendants and as such had a right to use the elevator which the defendants had provided for the use of their tenants. As she was in the act of stepping out of it, the car suddenly, without warning, went from under her. She tried to step back into the car but was caught, as it went down, between the top of the car and the floor of the building.
The elevator was used for both freight and passengers. When used for freight, the…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Lake v. Atlantic WorksMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1872
- Hill v. WinsorMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1875
- Horan v. Inhabitants of WatertownMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1914
- Higgins v. DeweyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1871
- Hollidge v. DuncanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1908
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by45 opinions
- Davis v. Boston Elevated Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1920
- Commonwealth v. DyerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1922
- Bellows v. Worcester Storage Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1937
- Leahy v. Standard Oil Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1916
- Morse v. Homer's Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1936
40 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.