Kenneson v. West End St. Ry. Co.

• Citation: 168 Mass. 1,46 N.E. 114
• Parties: KENNESON v. WEST END ST. RY. CO.
• Decision Date: 25 February 1897
• Court: United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts

168 Mass. 1

46 N.E. 114

KENNESON v. WEST END ST. RY. CO.

Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Suffolk.

February 25, 1897

COUNSEL

J.D. Long and J.A. Geough, for plaintiff.

William B. Sprout, for defendant.

OPINION

HOLMES, J.

This is an action for running over the plaintiff's intestate with an electric car on which he was employed as motorman. The car had reached its destination, Somerville. The conductor went to the Somerville end, shifted the trolley, and pushed in the fender. The deceased took off the motor handles and gong tapper, went to the other end, which now would be the front of the car, and was seen to stoop down, and to take hold of the fender. Very shortly afterwards, the car started, and he was caught under the wheels, and fatally injured. What caused the car to start is wholly uncertain. See Ross v. Cordage Co., 164 Mass. 257, 41 N.E. 284. It is suggested that the car was defective, but there is no satisfactory evidence that it was, or, if it was, that the defect was or ought to have been known to the defendant, or that it was of such a nature as to be likely to cause the start. It is equally or more likely that the car moved after the trolley was turned and readjusted, because the electricity had not been fully shut off, or because the deceased in some way moved the cable under the car which let on the power. The presiding judge was right in taking the case from the jury.

The examination of the conductor as to his competency to say what a trouble with the electric handles indicated is not reported. We cannot revise the judge's finding that the witness was not qualified to express an opinion. Com. v. Sturtivant, 117 Mass. 122, 137. Exceptions overruled.