Austin v. Boston & Maine Railroad

41 N.E. 288, 164 Mass. 282, 1895 Mass. LEXIS 227
CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
DecidedSeptember 9, 1895
StatusPublished
Cited by11 cases

This text of 41 N.E. 288 (Austin v. Boston & Maine Railroad) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Austin v. Boston & Maine Railroad, 41 N.E. 288, 164 Mass. 282, 1895 Mass. LEXIS 227 (Mass. 1895).

Opinion

Morton, J.

We do not see how this case can be distinguished from Lovejoy v. Boston & Lowell Railroad, 125 Mass. 79, Thain v. Old Colony Railroad, 161 Mass. 353, and Goodes v. Boston & Albany Railroad, 162 Mass. 287. The plaintiff had been employed as a freight brakeman on the Rockport freight for two years or more, and had had occasion to go by this post nearly or quite every day. The post was only one of many structures as near to the track as it was, and the plaintiff must be held to have taken the risk of injury from its proximity, whether he actually knew of the danger or not. The slight sagging of the post towards the track, of which there was evidence, is not shown to have had anything to do with the injury to the plaintiff.

Judgment for the defendant.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Kempton v. Boston Elevated Railway Co.
104 N.E. 358 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1914)
Bence v. New York, New Haven, & Hartford Railroad
63 N.E. 417 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1902)
Potter v. Detroit, Grand Haven & Milwaukee Railway Co.
122 Mich. 179 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1899)
Phelps v. Chicago & West Michigan Railway Co.
122 Mich. 171 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1899)
Leazotte v. Boston & Maine Railroad
45 A. 1084 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1899)
Quinn v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railroad
77 N.W. 464 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1898)
Davis v. Forbes
47 L.R.A. 170 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1898)
Murch v. Thomas Wilson's Sons & Co.
47 N.E. 111 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1897)
Bell v. New York, New Haven, & Hartford Railroad
47 N.E. 118 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1897)
Kenney v. Hingham Cordage Co.
47 N.E. 117 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1897)
Pennsylvania Co. v. Finney
42 N.E. 816 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1896)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
41 N.E. 288, 164 Mass. 282, 1895 Mass. LEXIS 227, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/austin-v-boston-maine-railroad-mass-1895.