Walsh v. Boston Elevated Railway Co.

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Walsh v. Boston Elevated Railway Co.

78 N.E. 451, 192 Mass. 423, 1906 Mass. LEXIS 969

CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

DecidedJune 21, 1906

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 78 N.E. 451 (Walsh v. Boston Elevated Railway Co.) 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

Walsh v. Boston Elevated Railway Co., 78 N.E. 451, 192 Mass. 423, 1906 Mass. LEXIS 969 (Mass. 1906).

Pincite

Opinion

Morton, J.

This case is governed by Woodall v. Boston Elevated Railway, ante, 308. It cannot be said as matter of law that the plaintiff was not in the exercise of due care because he looked up as the train was passing overhead, or that there was no evidence which would warrant a jury in finding that the particles which got into his eye came from the train on the elevated railway. Whether 'the defendant did all that could reasonably be required of it to prevent sparks from falling and injuring pedestrians and others using the street beneath was a question, under proper instructions, for the jury. This and the other questions raised are considered in the case above referred to, and need not be further considered here.

Exceptions sustained.

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

Morton, J.

This case is governed by Woodall v. Boston Elevated Railway, ante, 308. It cannot be said as matter of law that the plaintiff was not in the exercise of due care because he looked up as the train was passing overhead, or that there was no evidence which would warrant a jury in finding that the particles which got into his eye came from the train on the elevated railway. Whether 'the defendant did all that could reasonably be required of it to prevent sparks from falling and injuring pedestrians and others using the street beneath was a question, under proper instructions, for the jury. This and the other questions raised are considered in the case above referred to, and need not be further considered here.

Exceptions sustained.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

78 N.E. 451, 192 Mass. 423, 1906 Mass. LEXIS 969, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/walsh-v-boston-elevated-railway-co-mass-1906.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack