Morris v. Eastern Steamship Corp.
This text of 108 N.E. 1084 (Morris v. Eastern Steamship Corp.) 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 verdict for the defendant was ordered rightly, even if the defences of contributory negligence, assumption of risk, and that the injury was caused by the negligence of a fellow employee were not available under St. 1911, c. 751, Part I, § 1, because the company was not a subscriber.
The plaintiff failed to introduce any affirmative evidence from [308]*308which the jury would have been warranted in finding that the fall of the box resulted from either the defendant’s negligence, or the negligence of its servants. Hofnauer v. R. H. White Co. 186 Mass. 47. Droney v. Doherty, 186 Mass. 205, 206. Curtin v. Boston Elevated Railway, 194 Mass. 260. Ryan v. Fall River Iron Works Co. 200 Mass. 188.
Exceptions overruled.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
108 N.E. 1084, 221 Mass. 306, 1915 Mass. LEXIS 847, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/morris-v-eastern-steamship-corp-mass-1915.