Galligan v. Metacomet Manufacturing Co.

10 N.E. 171, 143 Mass. 527, 1887 Mass. LEXIS 346
CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
DecidedFebruary 23, 1887
StatusPublished
Cited by14 cases

This text of 10 N.E. 171 (Galligan v. Metacomet Manufacturing 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
Galligan v. Metacomet Manufacturing Co., 10 N.E. 171, 143 Mass. 527, 1887 Mass. LEXIS 346 (Mass. 1887).

Opinion

C. Allen, J.

The plaintiff, a child seven years of age, seeks to recover damages from the defendant corporation for an injury sustained by her from falling down a precipitous place in a vacant lot where she was playing; the lot being in the rear of the premises where she lived, and separated therefrom by a picket fence, with a gate. But we are unable to find anything in the evidence reported which shows that the defendant owed, or in any way failed in, any duty to the plaintiff in respect to the condition of the lot. The only evidence tending to connect the defendant therewith was that the fence and gate were built by the defendant’s workmen about five years ago, and that the workmen had a key to the gate. There was no evidence to show that the defendant owned, or occupied, or had the care of the lot, or even that it had any right to place a fence along the brow of the precipice; or that, at the time of the accident, it used the road which leads through the gate, or left it open on the day of the accident; or that it ever, in any way, induced or invited the plaintiff or other children to come upon the vacant ground to play, or that either the defendant or any other corporation, or any person owning or occupying the lot, ever did anything more than merely to suffer and permit the use of the [528]*528lot by tbe children. Merely abstaining from driving the children off is not an invitation which would impose any duty or responsibility for the condition of the lot. Sweeny v. Old Colony Railroad, 10 Allen, 368. Davis v. Central Congregational Society, 129 Mass. 367, 371. Morrissey v. Eastern Railroad, 126 Mass. 377. Severy v. Nickerson, 120 Mass. 306. Carleton v. Franconia Iron & Steel Co. 99 Mass. 216.

E. L. Barney, for the plaintiff. J. M. Morton ¿- A. J. Jennings, for the defendant.

Judgment on the verdict for the defendant.

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

Related

Maher v. City of Casper
219 P.2d 125 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 1950)
O'Hanley v. Norwood
8 Mass. App. Div. 213 (Mass. Dist. Ct., App. Div., 1943)
Bruso v. Eastern States Exposition
168 N.E. 206 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1929)
Hannan v. Ehrlich
102 Ohio St. (N.S.) 176 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1921)
Walker v. Fuller
223 Mass. 566 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1916)
Pastorello v. Stone
93 A. 529 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1915)
Hillman v. Boston Elevated Railway Co.
93 N.E. 653 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1911)
Middleton v. Reutler
141 A.D. 517 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1910)
Davis v. Joslin Manufacturing Co.
69 A. 65 (Supreme Court of Rhode Island, 1908)
McCann v. Thilemann
36 Misc. 145 (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 1901)
Shea v. Gurney
39 N.E. 996 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1895)
Stevens v. Nichols
29 N.E. 1150 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1892)
Redigan v. Boston & Maine Railroad
14 L.R.A. 276 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1891)
Reardon v. Thompson
21 N.E. 369 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1889)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
10 N.E. 171, 143 Mass. 527, 1887 Mass. LEXIS 346, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/galligan-v-metacomet-manufacturing-co-mass-1887.