Livermore v. Fitchburg Railroad
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
1Opinion of the CourtHolmes, J.
This is an action in two counts, under Pub. Sts.
c. 112, §§ 212, 213, to recover damages for causing the death of the plaintiff’s intestate by running him down at a crossing. To recover under § 212 it must be shown that the deceased was in the exercise of due diligence. To recover under § 213 it must be shown that the defendant neglected to sound its whistle or to ring its bell, as required by § 163 as amended by St. 1890, c. 173, § 1. Tyler v. Old Colony Railroad, 157 Mass. 336, 340. There was no evidence of either fact. The only evidence as to the bell is given by one witness, Harding, who…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Menard v. Boston & Maine RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1890
- Davis v. New York, New Haven, & Hartford RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1893
- Tyler v. Old Colony RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1892
- Hubbard v. Boston & Albany RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1893
- Crafts v. City of BostonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1872
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Slattery v. New York, New Haven, & Hartford RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1909
- Weidlich v. New York, New Haven & Hartford RailroadSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1919
- Emery v. Boston & Maine RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1899
- Reardon v. MarstonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1941
- Conaty v. New York, New Haven, & Hartford RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1895
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.