Gorman v. Woodbury
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Tort, for personal injuries occasioned to the plaintiff by the fall of a quantity of earth and gravel which he was engaged in excavating, while in the employ of the defendants. The declaration contained counts at common law, alleging negligence of the defendants, and counts under the employers’ liability act, St. 1887, c. 270, alleging negligence of the defendants’ superintendent.
Read the full summary
Tort, for personal injuries occasioned to the plaintiff by the fall of a quantity of earth and gravel which he was engaged in excavating, while in the employ of the defendants. The declaration contained counts at common law, alleging negligence of the defendants, and counts under the employers’ liability act, St. 1887, c. 270, alleging negligence of the defendants’ superintendent. Trial in the Superior Court, before Blodgett, J., who allowed a bill of exceptions, in substance as follows. The evidence showed that the defendants were excavating the cellar of the Union Station on Federal Street…
1Opinion of the CourtHammond, J.
The negligence, if any there was, was not that of the superintendent O’Brien, but of Murphy and his companion, who were at work driving wedges into the bank. These latter were fellow servants of the plaintiff, and, there being no claim that they were unsuitable persons for that work, the defendants are not answerable to the plaintiff for their negligence, either at common law or under the statute. Gouin v. Wampanoag Mills, 172 Mass. 222. Exceptions overruled.
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Gouin v. Wampanoag MillsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1898
3Cited by1 opinion
- Desautels v. CloutierMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1905