Turley v. Boston & Maine Railroad
This text of 47 A. 261 (Turley v. Boston & Maine Railroad) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of New Hampshire primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
As there was no evidence tending to show that the shooting of the plaintiff by Saxton resulted from any fault of the defendants, was directed by them or done by their authority, or was any part of Saxton’s work of cleaning and caring for the lamps in the yard, for which he was employed and which was the sole capacity in which he represented the defendants, it cannot be found that the act of Saxton complained of, whether willful or negligent, was the defendants’ act, or within the scope of Saxton’s employment by them. McGill v. Granite Co., ante, p. 125; Rowell v. Railroad, 68 N. H. 358; Andrews v. Green, 62 N. H. 436; Wilson v. Peverly, 2 N. H. 548.
Exception overruled: judgment for the defendants.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
47 A. 261, 70 N.H. 348, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/turley-v-boston-maine-railroad-nh-1900.