Murray v. Fitchburg Railroad
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Tort, by the administrator of the estate of Michael Murray. The first case was for personal injuries occasioned to the plaintiff’s intestate by being crushed between the end of a car and a bunting post, and the second was under Pub. Sts. c. 112, § 212, for causing his death. Trial in the Superior Court, before Maynard, J., who, at the defendant’s request, directed the jury to return a verdict for the defendant; and the plaintiff alleged exceptions.
Read the full summary
Tort, by the administrator of the estate of Michael Murray. The first case was for personal injuries occasioned to the plaintiff’s intestate by being crushed between the end of a car and a bunting post, and the second was under Pub. Sts. c. 112, § 212, for causing his death. Trial in the Superior Court, before Maynard, J., who, at the defendant’s request, directed the jury to return a verdict for the defendant; and the plaintiff alleged exceptions. The facts appear in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtKnowlton, J.
These cases present two questions; first, whether there was negligence on the part of the defendant’s *449servants, and, secondly, whether there was evidence that the plaintiff’s intestate was in the exercise of due care.
A Wagner sleeping car and one or two common passenger cars were coupled together, standing on the defendant’s easterly side track near the station in Boston, the rear car being three feet from a bunting post at the end of the track. The plaintiff’s intestate, in the performance of his duty, attempted to pass through between the end of the car and the bunting post, carrying two…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Berry v. New York Central & Hudson River RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1909
- Mullins v. New York, New Haven, & Hartford RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1909
- DeHardt v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1917
- Biondolillo v. . Erie R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1915