Tucker v. Massachusetts C. Railroad
| Decision Date | 22 October 1875 |
| Parties | Hiram Tucker v. Massachusetts Central Railroad |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
Worcester. Petition for the assessment of land damages sustained by the petitioner by reason of the passage of the respondent's railroad through his farm.
At the trial before a sheriff's jury it appeared that the farm containing about eighty acres, lay on both sides of an old established highway, the house and about ten acres of land being on the southerly side of the road, and about seventy acres of mowing, garden, pasture, and tillage lands lying on the northerly side of the highway. The railroad ran through the whole length of the seventy acres north of the road in a circular direction, not far from the highway, leaving the largest portion of the cultivated land across the railroad from his house, above and in the same direction as the highway, cutting the seventy acres in two parts, and rendering necessary some provision for passing and repassing across the railroad in carrying on the farm. The county commissioners had provided, in their order, for a cart and cattle pass under the railroad, for two grade crossings, and another cattle pass, and had ordered the railroad corporation to provide and maintain these crossings in a suitable and convenient manner.
The petitioner called as a witness one Ruggles, who testified that he resided about one fourth of a mile from the petitioner, that he had observed the provisions for the petitioner to cross the railroad, and the petitioner's mode and necessities in the management of his farm; that he had been in the habit of taking down and putting up bars himself as a farmer, and that there was another railroad in operation running through his farm. He was then asked the following question: "What, in your opinion, is the increased expense to the petitioner in carrying on his farm arising from the construction of this railroad through it as located?" To this question the counsel for the respondent objected, on the ground that it was not a proper subject for the opinion of witnesses, and further that if it were a proper subject for opinions, the witness had shown no such qualifications as would be necessary. The presiding officer permitted the question to be put, and the respondent excepted. The witness answered: "Fifty dollars per year." This matter of the inconvenient and expensive management of his farm, since the location of the railroad was made by the petitioner an important element in his claim for damages.
The jury returned a verdict for the petitioner, which was accepted by Colburn, J., in the Superior Court, and ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Bryan v. Northwest Beverages, Inc.
... ... showing qualification to so testify. We think that in the ... case of Tucker v. Massachusetts C.R. Co. 118 Mass ... 546, the court correctly held that 'the question whether ... ...
-
United States v. Stifel
...the ruling is manifestly erroneous. D. & C. Steam Towboat Co. v. Starrs, 69 Pa. St. 36; Page v. Parker, 40 N.H. 48; Tucker v. Massachusetts Central Railroad, 118 Mass. 546." Spring Co. v. Edgar, supra at 657-658, 25 L.Ed. In Frye v. United States, supra, the Court of Appeals for the Distric......
-
Leonard v. Fitchburg R.R.
...upon which he could so decide, or that the decision is founded upon some error of law. Com. v. Sturtivant, 117 Mass. 122;Tucker v. Massachusetts Cent.R.R., 118 Mass. 546;Hills v. Home Ins. Co., 129 Mass. 345;Perkins v. Stickney, 132 Mass. 217;Patton v. Bell, 141 Mass. 197; S.C. 5 N.E.Rep. 3......
-
Trustees of Boston Univ. v. Commonwealth
...fully govern the present case, in which the intervenign public ways were actually wrought and traveled. See, also, Tucker v. Massachusetts Central Railroad, 118 Mass. 546;Providence & Worcester Railroad v. Worcester, 155 Mass. 35, 40, 29 N. E. 56. The English cases tend in favor of the peti......