Eastman v. Boston & Maine Railroad
43 N.E. 115, 165 Mass. 342, 1896 Mass. LEXIS 258
Opinion
The statements by the plaintiff were simply a narrative of what had happened, and were not admissible as part of the res gestae. Lane v. Bryant, 9 Gray, 245. Commonwealth v. Hackett, 2 Allen, 136. Commonwealth v. McLaughlin, 5 Allen, 507. Williamson v. Cambridge Railroad, 144 Mass. 148.
Exceptions overruled.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Eastman v. Boston & Maine Railroad, 43 N.E. 115, 165 Mass. 342, 1896 Mass. LEXIS 258 (Mass. 1896).
43 N.E. 115 (Eastman v. Boston & Maine Railroad) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Commonwealth v. Hampton
221 N.E.2d 766 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1966)
Rocco v. Boston-Leader, Inc.
17 Mass. App. Dec. 65 (Mass. Dist. Ct., App. Div., 1959)
People v. Strewl
246 A.D. 400 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1936)
Dawson v. Bankers Life Co.
247 N.W. 279 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1933)
Murray v. Boston & Maine Railroad
61 L.R.A. 495 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1903)
Cole v. New York, New Haven, & Hartford Railroad
55 N.E. 1044 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1899)