Ryan v. New York, New Haven, & Hartford Railroad

47 N.E. 877, 169 Mass. 267, 1897 Mass. LEXIS 58
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court·Decided October 20, 1897·Published·Cited by 12 cases

Opinion

Holmes, J.

The fence which the plaintiff struck was a permanent visible structure, and under our decisions did not constitute one of those unusual dangers to which an employee who has not taken the risk of them with actual knowledge of their existence has a right to assume that he will not be exposed by entering an employment. It was not near enough to the track for that. It was three feet and nine and one half inches from the nearest rail. In Lovejoy v. Boston & Lowell Railroad, 125 Mass. 79, the obstruction was a little nearer the track, and the plaintiff had no actual knowledge of it. If opportunity to observe the danger be material, the plaintiff had had chance enough to do so. Bell v. New York, New Haven, & Hartford Railroad, 168 Mass. 443, and cases cited. Exceptions overruled.

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

Ryan v. New York, New Haven, & Hartford Railroad, 47 N.E. 877, 169 Mass. 267, 1897 Mass. LEXIS 58 (Mass. 1897).

47 N.E. 877 (Ryan v. New York, New Haven, & Hartford Railroad) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Cross v. Boston & Maine Railroad
223 Mass. 144 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1916)
Kempton v. Boston Elevated Railway Co.
104 N.E. 358 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1914)
Page v. St. Joseph Railway, Light, Heat & Power Co.
123 S.W. 511 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1909)
McLeod v. New York, New Haven, & Hartford Railroad
77 N.E. 715 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1906)
Wagner v. Boston Elevated Railway Co.
74 N.E. 919 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1905)
Fearns v. New York Central & Hudson River Railroad
72 N.E. 68 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1904)
Withee v. Somerset Traction Co.
56 A. 204 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1903)
Bence v. New York, New Haven, & Hartford Railroad
63 N.E. 417 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1902)
Hall v. Wakefield & Stoneham Street Railway Co.
178 Mass. 98 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1901)
Quinn v. New York, New Haven, & Hartford Railroad
55 N.E. 891 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1900)
Potter v. Detroit, Grand Haven & Milwaukee Railway Co.
122 Mich. 179 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1899)
Phelps v. Chicago & West Michigan Railway Co.
122 Mich. 171 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1899)