169 Mass. 516 (1897), Newton v. City of Worcester

Citation:169 Mass. 516, 48 N.E. 274
Opinion Judge:[48 N.E. 275] ALLEN, J.
Party Name:NEWTON v. CITY OF WORCESTER.
Attorney:[48 N.E. 274] Charles C. Milton and Charles W. Saunders, for plaintiff. Arthur P. Rugg and W.S.B. Hopkins, for defendant.
Case Date:November 23, 1897
Court:Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts

Page 516

169 Mass. 516 (1897)

48 N.E. 274

NEWTON

v.

CITY OF WORCESTER.

Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Worcester.

November 23, 1897

COUNSEL

[48 N.E. 274] Charles

Page 518

C. Milton and Charles W. Saunders, for plaintiff.

Arthur P. Rugg and W.S.B. Hopkins, for defendant.

OPINION

[48 N.E. 275] ALLEN, J.

We think a somewhat broader construction should be given to the language of St.1896, c. 540, than was given to it by the presiding justice. The legislature obviously thought that too heavy a burden rested upon cities and towns under the previous statutes, and the statute was probably designed to exempt them from liability under such circumstances as were found to exist in Adams v. Chicopee, 147 Mass. 440, 18 N.E. 231, and Hughes v. City of Lawrence, 160 Mass. 474, 36 N.E. 485. Accordingly, it is now provided that "no city or town shall be liable for any injury or damage to person or property hereafter received or suffered in or upon any part of a highway, townway, causeway, or bridge, by reason or in consequence of snow or ice thereon, if the place at which the injury or damage was received or suffered was at the time of the accident otherwise reasonably safe and convenient for travelers." This must mean, we think, that a way shall not be deemed unsafe by reason of snow or ice thereon if it would be reasonably safe and convenient for travelers but for the presence of snow or ice thereon. The second request for instructions, therefore, should have been given.

The plaintiff contends that the defendant did not properly save an exception upon the above point. But it appears to have been well understood on all hands that the defendant wished to have the construction of the statute determined by this court in case the ruling of the presiding justice should be adverse to its contention. Under these circumstances, it was quite right to allow the...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP
14 practice notes
  • 108 Cal.App.2d 475, 18484, Grossblatt v. Wright
    • United States
    • California California Court of Appeals
    • December 28, 1951
    ...nature of the objection." [15] Fitzgerald v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 90 Vt. 291 [98 A. 498, 506.]; Newton v. City of Worcester, 169 Mass. 516 [48 N.E. 274, 275]; Snelling v. Yetter, 25 A.D. 590 [49 N.Y.S. 917], in which the court said, p. 918 [49 N.Y.S.]: "An exception is but ......
  • 291 Mass. 143 (1935), DePrizio v. F. W. Woolworth Co.
    • United States
    • Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts
    • June 26, 1935
    ...for injuries sustained by reason of defects in public ways, dependent in part upon snow and ice ( Newton v. City of Worcester, 169 Mass. 516, 48 N.E. 274; Id., 174 Mass. 181, 54 N.E. 521) at places not exposed to the weather, and where snow or moisture had been tracked by travelers, as for ......
  • 317 Mass. 164 (1944), Graustein v. Boston & Maine R. R.
    • United States
    • Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts
    • October 25, 1944
    ...judge to believe that he desired to take an exception, are distinguishable. See Leyland v. Pingree, 134 Mass. 367; Newton v. Worcester, 169 Mass. 516; Jones v. Newton Street Railway, 186 Mass. 113; Thurston v. Blunt, 216 Mass. 264. The motion to dismiss the exceptions is allowed. So ordered....
  • 216 Mass. 264 (1913), Thurston v. Blunt
    • United States
    • Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts
    • December 15, 1913
    ...the party wishes to save an exception. Leyland v. Pingree, 134 Mass. 367, 370; Thwing v. Clifford, 136 Mass. 482; Newton v. Worcester, 169 Mass. 516, 48 N.E. 274; Jones v. Newton St. Ry., 186 Mass. 113, 114, 71 N.E. 114. We are also of opinion that the exceptions were saved in time. Where a......
  • Free signup to view additional results
14 cases
  • 108 Cal.App.2d 475, 18484, Grossblatt v. Wright
    • United States
    • California California Court of Appeals
    • December 28, 1951
    ...nature of the objection." [15] Fitzgerald v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 90 Vt. 291 [98 A. 498, 506.]; Newton v. City of Worcester, 169 Mass. 516 [48 N.E. 274, 275]; Snelling v. Yetter, 25 A.D. 590 [49 N.Y.S. 917], in which the court said, p. 918 [49 N.Y.S.]: "An exception is but ......
  • 291 Mass. 143 (1935), DePrizio v. F. W. Woolworth Co.
    • United States
    • Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts
    • June 26, 1935
    ...for injuries sustained by reason of defects in public ways, dependent in part upon snow and ice ( Newton v. City of Worcester, 169 Mass. 516, 48 N.E. 274; Id., 174 Mass. 181, 54 N.E. 521) at places not exposed to the weather, and where snow or moisture had been tracked by travelers, as for ......
  • 317 Mass. 164 (1944), Graustein v. Boston & Maine R. R.
    • United States
    • Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts
    • October 25, 1944
    ...judge to believe that he desired to take an exception, are distinguishable. See Leyland v. Pingree, 134 Mass. 367; Newton v. Worcester, 169 Mass. 516; Jones v. Newton Street Railway, 186 Mass. 113; Thurston v. Blunt, 216 Mass. 264. The motion to dismiss the exceptions is allowed. So ordered....
  • 216 Mass. 264 (1913), Thurston v. Blunt
    • United States
    • Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts
    • December 15, 1913
    ...the party wishes to save an exception. Leyland v. Pingree, 134 Mass. 367, 370; Thwing v. Clifford, 136 Mass. 482; Newton v. Worcester, 169 Mass. 516, 48 N.E. 274; Jones v. Newton St. Ry., 186 Mass. 113, 114, 71 N.E. 114. We are also of opinion that the exceptions were saved in time. Where a......
  • Free signup to view additional results