Mack v. Boston & Albany Railroad

41 N.E. 653, 164 Mass. 393, 1895 Mass. LEXIS 248
CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
DecidedOctober 17, 1895
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 41 N.E. 653 (Mack v. Boston & Albany Railroad) 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
Mack v. Boston & Albany Railroad, 41 N.E. 653, 164 Mass. 393, 1895 Mass. LEXIS 248 (Mass. 1895).

Opinion

Lathrop, J.

This is an action of tort, for personal injuries sustained hy the plaintiff while travelling upon a public highway in the town of Adams, at a place where the highway crosses at grade a railroad operated by the defendant under a lease. The crossing was covered with planks. The plaintiff, who was driving at night in a carriage drawn by a span of horses, so guided his horses that the left forward wheel of his carriage did not touch the planks, but struck one of the rails of the railroad. This caused the wheel to break, the horses ran, and the plaintiff was thrown out and injured. We assume in his favor, without deciding, that there was evidence which would warrant a jury in finding that the planks did not correspond with the travelled part of the way, so that there was evidence of a defect in the way caused by the defendant.

We are of opinion, nevertheless, that the presiding justice of the Superior Court rightly ordered a verdict for the defendant. The declaration does not allege that any written notice of the time, place, and cause of the injury was given to the defendant, and the bill of exceptions states that no such notice was served upon it. By the Pub. Sts. c. 52, § 1, highways are to be kept in repair at the expense of the town, city, or place in which they are situated, “ when other provision is not made therefor, so that the same may be reasonably safe and convenient for travellers, with their horses, teams, and carriages, at all seasons of the [394]*394year.” Section 18 of the same chapter gives a right of action to a person injured through a defect or want of repair in a highway, town way, causeway, or bridge, against the county, town, place, or persons by law obliged to repair the same. Section 19 provides that “a person so injured shall, within thirty days thereafter, give to the county,, town, place, or persons by law obliged'to keep said highway, town way, causeway, or bridge in repair, notice of the time, place, and cause of the said injury or damage.” And by § 21 such notice is required to be in writing. The duty of keeping a highway in repair, where it is crossed by a railroad, is imposed upon a railroad corporation by the Pub. Sts. c. 112, § 124, which provides that it shall “ so guard or protect its rails by plank, timber, or otherwise, as to secure a safe and easy passage across its road.” That the railroad corporation is entitled to a notice, under §§ 19 and 21, for an injury caused by a failure on its part to perform the obligation imposed upon it by law, is settled by the case of Dickie v. Boston Albany Railroad, 131 Mass. 516. Exceptions overruled.

M. E. Couch, (C. J. Parkhurst with him,) for the plaintiff. M. Wilcox, for the defendant.

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

Related

Longley v. City of Worcester
24 N.E.2d 533 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1939)
Hurlburt v. Town of Great Barrington
16 N.E.2d 71 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1938)
Conary v. Boston & Maine Railroad
252 Mass. 397 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1925)
Braley v. Massachusetts Northeastern Street Railway Co.
236 Mass. 275 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1920)
Harris v. Boston & Maine Railroad
98 N.E. 578 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1912)
Hyde v. City of Boston
71 N.E. 118 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1904)
Mack v. New York, New Haven, & Hartford Railroad
51 N.E. 1076 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1898)
Dobbins v. West End Street Railway Co.
47 N.E. 428 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1897)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
41 N.E. 653, 164 Mass. 393, 1895 Mass. LEXIS 248, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mack-v-boston-albany-railroad-mass-1895.