Tully v. Fitchburg Railroad
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Tort, for personal injuries occasioned to the plaintiff’s intestate, John Tully, by being struck by a locomotive engine belonging to the defendant, at a footpath crossing in Somerville. At the trial in the Superior Court, before Rockwell, J., the jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff; and the defendant alleged exceptions, which appear in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtColburn, J.
The first exception of the defendant is to the refusal of the court to rule that there was no sufficient evidence of due care on the part of the plaintiff’s intestate.
It was necessary for the plaintiff to show affirmatively that her intestate was in the exercise of due care, or at least that there was nothing in his conduct, either of act or neglect, to which the injury could be attributed, in whole or in part. Chaffee v. Boston & Lowell Railroad, 104 Mass. 108. Mayo v. Boston & Maine Railroad, 104 Mass. 137. Allyn v. Boston & Albany Railroad, 105 Mass. 77. The accident occurred in daylight,…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Gaynor v. Old Colony & Newport Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1868
- Mayo v. Boston & Maine RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1870
- Allyn v. Boston & Albany RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1870
- Chaffee v. Boston & Lowell RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1870
- Kennedy v. Standard Sugar RefineryMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1878
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by68 opinions
- Commonwealth v. DascalakisMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1923
- Brown v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1899
- Fleenor v. Oregon Short Line RailroadIdaho Supreme Court · 1909
- Cotton v. Willmar & Sioux Falls Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1906
- State v. SlorahSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1919
63 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.