Coleman v. Lowell, Lawrence & Haverhill Street Railway Co.
This text of 64 N.E. 402 (Coleman v. Lowell, Lawrence & Haverhill Street Railway Co.) 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.
Opinion
The only contention now made in support of the bill of exceptions is that the plaintiff was not in the exercise of due care. He testified without objection that he judged the car to be a safe distance away. There was conflicting evidence as to the distance of the car from the team when the plaintiff attempted to cross the track, and also as to the speed of the car. In our opinion the question whether the plaintiff was in the exercise of due care was for the jury.
Exceptions overruled.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
64 N.E. 402, 181 Mass. 591, 1902 Mass. LEXIS 933, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/coleman-v-lowell-lawrence-haverhill-street-railway-co-mass-1902.