Fleck v. Union Railway Co.

134 Mass. 480, 1883 Mass. LEXIS 335
CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
DecidedMarch 2, 1883
StatusPublished
Cited by21 cases

This text of 134 Mass. 480 (Fleck v. Union 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.

Bluebook
Fleck v. Union Railway Co., 134 Mass. 480, 1883 Mass. LEXIS 335 (Mass. 1883).

Opinion

C. Allen, J.

There was some evidence tending to show carelessness on the part of the plaintiff, but, under all the circumstances stated, it was not so palpable as to preclude him from a right to have it passed upon by the jury. Standing on the rear platform of a street car in motion, when there is room inside, is not conclusive. The existence of snow and ice upon the platform is not necessarily such an element of danger as to be conclusive proof of negligence on the part of one who, with knowledge, undertakes to stand there for a moment or two, in expectation of the car’s stopping to let him get off. Omitting to take hold of the rail will not of itself, as matter of law, prevent a recovery. Nor do these facts when combined show a case where common experience and the general sense of all prudent persons at once stamp the act as one of carelessness and reckless disregard of personal safety. The case does not fall within Wills v. Lynn Boston Railroad, 129 Mass. 351, and other cases, where it could properly be held that, as matter of law, the plaintiff did not sustain the burden of proving that he was in the exercise of due care; but rather within the class of cases of [482]*482which Treat v. Boston & Lowell Railroad, 131 Mass. 371, may be taken as an example. No question is presented as to whether there was any sufficient evidence of negligence on the part of the defendant. The case had not reached a proper stage for a ruling on that point. 1Yew trial granted.

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

Related

Harrison v. Boston Elevated Railway Co.
55 N.E.2d 707 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1944)
Jorge v. Umpierre
49 P.R. 75 (Supreme Court of Puerto Rico, 1935)
Neri Jorge v. Umpierre
49 P.R. Dec. 78 (Supreme Court of Puerto Rico, 1935)
Indiana Union Traction Co. v. Keiter
92 N.E. 982 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1910)
Eldredge v. Boston Elevated Railway Co.
89 N.E. 1041 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1909)
Cutts v. Boston Elevated Railway Co.
89 N.E. 21 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1909)
Frost v. McCarthy
86 N.E. 918 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1909)
Mason v. Boston & Northern Street Railway Co.
76 N.E. 717 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1906)
Brunnchow v. Rhode Island Company
58 A. 656 (Supreme Court of Rhode Island, 1904)
Foster v. Old Colony Street Railway Co.
65 N.E. 795 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1903)
Oddy v. West End Street Railway Co.
59 N.E. 1026 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1901)
Hall v. Wakefield & Stoneham Street Railway Co.
178 Mass. 98 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1901)
Watson v. Portland & Cape Elizabeth Railway Co.
44 L.R.A. 157 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1898)
Watkins v. Birmingham Railway & Electric Co.
120 Ala. 147 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1897)
Bailey v. Tacoma Traction Co.
47 P. 241 (Washington Supreme Court, 1896)
Wilde v. Lynn & Boston Railroad
40 N.E. 851 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1895)
Seymour v. Citizens' Railway Co.
21 S.W. 739 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1893)
Matz v. St. Paul City Ry. Co.
53 N.W. 1071 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1893)
Powers v. City of Boston
27 N.E. 995 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1891)
McDonough v. Metropolitan Railroad
137 Mass. 210 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1884)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
134 Mass. 480, 1883 Mass. LEXIS 335, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fleck-v-union-railway-co-mass-1883.