Healey v. Wellesley & Boston Street Railway Co.
This text of 57 N.E. 703 (Healey v. Wellesley & Boston 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 evidence to which the plaintiff excepted was admitted, as the exceptions state, solely for the purpose of contradicting Michael Healey, who was foreman of the gang in which the plaintiff worked, and who had testified how much the plaintiff was absent for several days following the accident. The time book from which the witness Child was allowed to testify was turned in to him by Michael Healey, and showed “ the time worked by the employees in his gang during December, 1897, and up to October, 1898.” Whether the entries were actually made by Michael Healey or not was immaterial. His act in turning the book in as the record of the time worked by the men in his gang amounted to a representation that they had worked the time therein set down, and as such evidence of the entries was admissible to contradict him. See Brigham v. Clark, 100 Mass. 430; Handy v. Canning, 166 Mass. 107.
Exceptions overruled.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
57 N.E. 703, 176 Mass. 440, 1900 Mass. LEXIS 938, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/healey-v-wellesley-boston-street-railway-co-mass-1900.