Young v. Boston & Maine Railroad
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Tort, by the administrator of the estate of Lester N. Young, for causing his death. Trial in the Superior Court, before Fessenden, J., who, at the defendant’s request, ruled that the evidence would not warrant a verdict for the plaintiff, and 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.
We may assume in favor of the plaintiff that there was evidence from which the jury might have found that his intestate was in the exercise of due care. If we assume, without deciding, that a liability under St. 1887, c. 73, of the laws of New Hampshire,* could be enforced in this Com*220monwealth under the doctrine stated in Higgins v. Central New England & Western Railroad, 155 Mass. 176, we come to the question whether there was evidence of negligence on the part of the defendant.
The accident happened in New Hampshire, and as the statutes of 1887, c. 270, and 1893, c. 359, have no…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Higgins v. Central New England & Western RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1892
- Johnson v. Boston Tow-Boat Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1883
- Thyng v. Fitchburg RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1892
- McGee v. Boston Cordage Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1885
- Allen v. G. W. & F. Smith Iron Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1894
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Barrington v. BarringtonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1917
- Miller v. New York, New Haven, & Hartford RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1900
- Ford v. Eastern Bridge & Structural Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1906
- Powers v. Boston & Maine RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1900
- Lemieux v. Boston & Maine RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1914
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.