Bell v. New York, New Haven, & Hartford Railroad

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Bell v. New York, New Haven, & Hartford Railroad

47 N.E. 118, 168 Mass. 443, 1897 Mass. LEXIS 259

CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

DecidedMay 21, 1897

StatusPublished

Cited by12 cases

This text of 47 N.E. 118 (Bell v. New York, New Haven, & Hartford 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

Bell v. New York, New Haven, & Hartford Railroad, 47 N.E. 118, 168 Mass. 443, 1897 Mass. LEXIS 259 (Mass. 1897).

Pincite

Opinion

Holmes, J.

This is an action at common law for personal injuries. The plaintiff was a brakeman employed by the defendant as a shifter at night. As he was getting down from the top of a car by a side ladder, there being no end ladder, in order to pull out a pin and disconnect his car from the engine, he came in contact with one of the iron pillars of a bridge over the track and was hurt. The pillar was about four feet from the track. The plaintiff knew of the bridge, and was an experienced hand. He also knew that cars might have only side and no end ladders. It is suggested on the strength of photographs exhibited that the pillar which probably did the harm was inside the line of the rest, and that there was a trap, as was held in Ferren v. Old Colony Railroad, 143 Mass. 197. It is enough to say that, in our opinion, the photographs do not warrant the inference. We do not perceive any sufficient distinction between this and the numerous cases which have been before us of late years, and in which it has been held that the plaintiff took the risk of such dangers and could not recover. Vining v. New York & New England Railroad, 167 Mass. 539. Content v. New York, New Haven, Hartford Railroad, 165 Mass. 267. Austin v. Boston & Maine Railroad, 164 Mass. 282. Goodes v. Boston & Albany Railroad, 162 Mass. 287. Thain v. Old Colony Railroad, 161 Mass. 353. Goldthwait v. Haverhill & Groveland Street Railway, 160 Mass. 554. Fisk v. Fitchburg Railroad, 158 Mass. 238. Lovejoy v. Boston & Lowell Railroad, 125 Mass. 79.

Judgment for the defendant.

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

Holmes, J.

This is an action at common law for personal injuries. The plaintiff was a brakeman employed by the defendant as a shifter at night. As he was getting down from the top of a car by a side ladder, there being no end ladder, in order to pull out a pin and disconnect his car from the engine, he came in contact with one of the iron pillars of a bridge over the track and was hurt. The pillar was about four feet from the track. The plaintiff knew of the bridge, and was an experienced hand. He also knew that cars might have only side and no end ladders. It is suggested on the strength of photographs exhibited that the pillar which probably did the harm was inside the line of the rest, and that there was a trap, as was held in Ferren v. Old Colony Railroad, 143 Mass. 197. It is enough to say that, in our opinion, the photographs do not warrant the inference. We do not perceive any sufficient distinction between this and the numerous cases which have been before us of late years, and in which it has been held that the plaintiff took the risk of such dangers and could not recover. Vining v. New York & New England Railroad, 167 Mass. 539. Content v. New York, New Haven, Hartford Railroad, 165 Mass. 267. Austin v. Boston & Maine Railroad, 164 Mass. 282. Goodes v. Boston & Albany Railroad, 162 Mass. 287. Thain v. Old Colony Railroad, 161 Mass. 353. Goldthwait v. Haverhill & Groveland Street Railway, 160 Mass. 554. Fisk v. Fitchburg Railroad, 158 Mass. 238. Lovejoy v. Boston & Lowell Railroad, 125 Mass. 79.

Judgment for the defendant.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

47 N.E. 118, 168 Mass. 443, 1897 Mass. LEXIS 259, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bell-v-new-york-new-haven-hartford-railroad-mass-1897.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack