De Forge v. New York, New Haven, & Hartford Railroad
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Tort, under St. 1887, c. 270, for injuries sustained by a freight brakeman while in the employ of the defendant, through the negligence of the engineer of a locomotive engine of the defendant, on which the plaintiff was riding. Writ dated October 13, 1899. At the trial in the Superior Court, before Dewey, J., the jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff; and the defendant alleged exceptions, which appear in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtLathrop, J.
The first question in this case is whether the notice required by the St. of 1887, c. 270, § 3, was given to the defendant. The statute requires that it is to be “given to the employer.” The person to whom the notice was given was the freight agent of the defendant in Springfield. He testified that he sent it to William E. Barnett, the attorney for the defendant in New Haven ; that he so sent it in pursuance of gen-, eral printed instructions, directing him to send such notices as pertained to Barnett’s department; and that he had received such notices for five years. We do not think it…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Woodward v. LeavittMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1871
- Blair v. Inhabitants of PelhamMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1875
- Bruce v. BeallTennessee Supreme Court · 1897
- Chandler v. Jamaica Pond Aqueduct Corp.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1877
- Turner v. Boston & Maine RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1893
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by29 opinions
- Simmons v. FishMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1912
- Commonwealth v. GiacomazzaMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1942
- Jennings v. RooneyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1903
- McKee v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1949
- Everson v. Casualty Co. of AmericaMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1911
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.