Story v. Concord & Montreal Railroad
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Case, to recover for injuries received August 26, 1894, in the railroad yard at Portsmouth, by the derailment of an engine of tlie Concord & Montreal Railroad on which the plaintiff was fireman. The plaintiff was the servant of the Concord & Montreal Railroad. It was alleged that the' derailment was due to the defective condition of the track, which was owned and repaired by the Boston & Maine Railroad. The suit was brought against both corporations.
Read the full summary
Case, to recover for injuries received August 26, 1894, in the railroad yard at Portsmouth, by the derailment of an engine of tlie Concord & Montreal Railroad on which the plaintiff was fireman. The plaintiff was the servant of the Concord & Montreal Railroad. It was alleged that the' derailment was due to the defective condition of the track, which was owned and repaired by the Boston & Maine Railroad. The suit was brought against both corporations. At the. opening of the trial, the defendants moved for separate trials and that the plaintiff be required to elect against which defendant he…
1Opinion of the Court
Whether justice and convenience required separate trials was a question of fact determined by the ruling of the presiding justice. Eames v. Stevens, 26 N.H. 117, 121.
The Boston Maine Railroad having been discharged by a verdict in their favor, to the direction of which by the court no exception appears to have been taken, the only question is whether, upon the facts stated, the verdict found by the jury against the Concord Montreal Railroad should stand. As the case is presented to us, the Concord Montreal Railroad are the sole defendants.
It appears that the plaintiff, a locomotive fireman in…
2Cases cited55 opinions
- Mulchey v. Methodist Religious SocietyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1878
- Mitchell v. Boston & Maine RailroadSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1894
- Bullard v. Boston & Maine RailroadSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1886
- Nugent v. Boston, Concord & Montreal RailroadSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1888
- Nashua Iron & Steel Co. v. Worcester & Nashua RailroadSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1882
50 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by38 opinions
- Sinkler v. Missouri Pacific RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
- Clark v. St. Louis & Suburban Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1911
- Brown v. StateMississippi Supreme Court · 1946
- Broderick v. WattsSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1992
- Brown v. StateMississippi Supreme Court · 1910
33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.