Sampson v. Metropolitan Transit Authority

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Sampson v. Metropolitan Transit Authority

83 N.E.2d 876, 323 Mass. 757, 1949 Mass. LEXIS 512

CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

DecidedFebruary 3, 1949

StatusPublished

This text of 83 N.E.2d 876 (Sampson v. Metropolitan Transit Authority) 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

Sampson v. Metropolitan Transit Authority, 83 N.E.2d 876, 323 Mass. 757, 1949 Mass. LEXIS 512 (Mass. 1949).

Pincite

Opinion

Exceptions overruled. The plaintiff, a passenger who was hurt alighting from a bus of the Boston Elevated Railway Company, brings this action of tort. The defendant was substituted as party defendant. St. 1947, c. 544, § 20. [758]*758The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff following the denial of the defendant’s motion for a directed verdict. There was no error. There was evidence that the bus had stopped close to the curbstone in response to the plaintiff’s ringing the signal bell; that the operator opened the doors for her to leave; and that while both her feet were on the lower step and just as she was about to step off, the bus suddenly started and threw her onto the sidewalk, breaking her hip. The plaintiff testified that she did not know what caused the bus to start. Upon the evidence it was a question for the jury whether the plaintiff’s injuries were due to the defendant’s negligence. McDernott v. Boston Elevated Railway, 208 Mass. 104. Killam v. Wellesley & Boston Street Railway, 214 Mass. 283, 284-285. Gray v. Boston Elevated Railway, 215 Mass. 143, 145, 148. Weil v. Boston Elevated Railway, 218 Mass. 397. Perella v. Boston Elevated Railway, 306 Mass. 547, 549. Pelland v. D’Allesandro, 321 Mass. 387, 389.

A. W. Wunderly, for the defendant. T. J. Murphy, for the plaintiff.

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

Exceptions overruled. The plaintiff, a passenger who was hurt alighting from a bus of the Boston Elevated Railway Company, brings this action of tort. The defendant was substituted as party defendant. St. 1947, c. 544, § 20. [758]*758The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff following the denial of the defendant’s motion for a directed verdict. There was no error. There was evidence that the bus had stopped close to the curbstone in response to the plaintiff’s ringing the signal bell; that the operator opened the doors for her to leave; and that while both her feet were on the lower step and just as she was about to step off, the bus suddenly started and threw her onto the sidewalk, breaking her hip. The plaintiff testified that she did not know what caused the bus to start. Upon the evidence it was a question for the jury whether the plaintiff’s injuries were due to the defendant’s negligence. McDernott v. Boston Elevated Railway, 208 Mass. 104. Killam v. Wellesley & Boston Street Railway, 214 Mass. 283, 284-285. Gray v. Boston Elevated Railway, 215 Mass. 143, 145, 148. Weil v. Boston Elevated Railway, 218 Mass. 397. Perella v. Boston Elevated Railway, 306 Mass. 547, 549. Pelland v. D’Allesandro, 321 Mass. 387, 389.

A. W. Wunderly, for the defendant. T. J. Murphy, for the plaintiff.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

83 N.E.2d 876, 323 Mass. 757, 1949 Mass. LEXIS 512, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sampson-v-metropolitan-transit-authority-mass-1949.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack