Sullivan v. Rockland, Thomaston & Camden Steel Railway

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Sullivan v. Rockland, Thomaston & Camden Steel Railway

85 A. 55, 109 Me. 570, 1912 Me. LEXIS 158

DecidedDecember 4, 1912

StatusPublished

This text of 85 A. 55 (Sullivan v. Rockland, Thomaston & Camden Steel Railway) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Judicial Court of Maine primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Sullivan v. Rockland, Thomaston & Camden Steel Railway, 85 A. 55, 109 Me. 570, 1912 Me. LEXIS 158 (Me. 1912).

Pincite

Opinion

This is an action to recover damages for personal injuries resulting in the death of Sortir Theodos, plaintiff’s intestate. Sortir was one of a crew of men who, on the 23d day of December, 1910, under charge of William Walker, foreman, went to work for defendant discharging a cargo of coal in defendants’ cars at the wharf at Glencove, in town of Rockport, Me. The evidence shows that the accident [571]*571which caused the death of plaintiff’s intestate, was due to, or contributed to, by a fellow servant. At the conclusion of the plaintiff’s testimony, the presiding Justice ordered a nonsuit and the plaintiff excepted to said order. Exceptions overruled.

Philip Howard, for plaintiff. A. S. Littlefield and Alan L. Bird, for defendant.

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

This is an action to recover damages for personal injuries resulting in the death of Sortir Theodos, plaintiff’s intestate. Sortir was one of a crew of men who, on the 23d day of December, 1910, under charge of William Walker, foreman, went to work for defendant discharging a cargo of coal in defendants’ cars at the wharf at Glencove, in town of Rockport, Me. The evidence shows that the accident [571]*571which caused the death of plaintiff’s intestate, was due to, or contributed to, by a fellow servant. At the conclusion of the plaintiff’s testimony, the presiding Justice ordered a nonsuit and the plaintiff excepted to said order. Exceptions overruled.

Philip Howard, for plaintiff. A. S. Littlefield and Alan L. Bird, for defendant.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

85 A. 55, 109 Me. 570, 1912 Me. LEXIS 158, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sullivan-v-rockland-thomaston-camden-steel-railway-me-1912.