Messenger v. Dennie

5 N.E. 283, 141 Mass. 335, 1886 Mass. LEXIS 200
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court·Decided March 17, 1886·Published·Cited by 18 cases

Opinion

By the Court.

When this case was before the court at a former term, it was decided that, upon the facts then appearing, the plaintiff was not entitled to recover. Messenger v. Bennie, 137 Mass. 197. The facts offered to be shown at the second trial do not in any essential particular differ from those shown at the first trial. The plaintiff was engaged in the dangerous sport of riding upon the runners of a sleigh in the public street; he suddenly left the runner of the sleigh on which he was riding, while it was in motion, in front and within a few feet of the sleigh driven by the defendant, who was driving at a moderate rate of speed. If, as is now claimed, the plaintiff saw the defendant’s team approaching, it does not help his case. He thoughtlessly and imprudently put himself in a position of danger, and, upon the facts, his injury is attributable to his own carelessness, and not to any negligence of the defendant.

Judgment on the verdict.

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

Messenger v. Dennie, 5 N.E. 283, 141 Mass. 335, 1886 Mass. LEXIS 200 (Mass. 1886).

5 N.E. 283 (Messenger v. Dennie) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Lembo v. Sangermeno
6 Mass. App. Div. 313 (Mass. Dist. Ct., App. Div., 1941)
Wade v. Buchanan
28 N.E.2d 421 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1940)
Willar v. Bergman
2 Mass. App. Div. 213 (Mass. Dist. Ct., App. Div., 1937)
Hicks v. H. B. Church Truck Service Co.
156 N.E. 254 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1927)
Miller v. Flash Chemical Co.
230 Mass. 419 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1918)
Mills v. Powers
102 N.E. 912 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1913)
Schoonover v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad
73 S.E. 266 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1911)
Russo v. Charles S. Brown Co.
84 N.E. 840 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1908)
Beale v. Old Colony Street Railway Co.
81 N.E. 867 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1907)
Kolar v. Erie Ry.
33 Ohio C.C. Dec. 658 (Cuyahoga Circuit Court, 1905)
Mullen v. Springfield Street Railway Co.
41 N.E. 664 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1895)
Casey v. City of Malden
40 N.E. 849 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1895)
Hayes v. Norcross
39 N.E. 282 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1895)
Terre Haute Street Railway Co. v. Tappenbeck
36 N.E. 915 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1894)
Patterson v. Hemenway
19 N.E. 15 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1888)
Twist v. Winona & St. Peter Railroad
39 N.W. 402 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1888)
O'Shaughnessy v. Suffolk Brewing Co.
14 N.E. 779 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1888)
Collins v. South Boston Railroad
7 N.E. 856 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1886)