Bradshaw v. South B. R. Co.

• Decision Date: 07 September 1883
• Citation: 135 Mass. 407
• Parties: Stanton Bradshaw v. South Boston Railroad Company
• Court: United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court

135 Mass. 407

Stanton Bradshaw v. South Boston Railroad Company

Supreme Court of Massachusetts

September 7, 1883

Suffolk. Tort for being expelled from one of the defendant's cars. Trial in the Superior Court, without a jury, before Colburn, J., who reported the case for the determination of this court, in substance as follows:

The defendant is a common carrier of passengers, for hire, owning lines of street cars between South Boston and Boston proper and, among others, one running over Federal Street Bridge between Boston and City Point in South Boston by what is called the Bay View route, and another running over Dover Street Bridge between Boston and said City Point by way of Broadway. None of the Dover Street cars run over the Bay View route, and none of the Bay View cars run over Dover Street. When a passenger on the Bay View line wishes to enter the city by way of Dover Street, it is the practice of the defendant, after he has paid his fare and arrived at the proper place for changing cars, to give him a check, which states that it is good, only on the day of its date, for one continuous ride, for Bay View passengers, from Dorchester Avenue to the Providence Depot. When a passenger on the Dover Street line wishes to go to some place in South Boston on the Bay View line, it is the practice, after he had paid his fare and arrived at the proper place for changing cars, for the defendant to give him a check, which states that it is good only on the day of its date, for one continuous ride from Dorchester Avenue to City Point via Bay View. The upper left quarter and the lower right quarter of the first-mentioned checks are colored red, and the corresponding quarters of the other checks are colored yellow. The plaintiff was familiar with the practice above mentioned, and had received and used such checks, but had never read them, though able to read, and had never noticed the difference in the color of the checks.

In the afternoon of May 15, 1881, the plaintiff entered one of the Bay View cars of the defendant at the corner of Eighth Street and Dorchester Street in South Boston, intending to go to the corner of Dover Street and Washington Street in Boston, and thence over the Metropolitan Horse Railroad to some point on that line. He paid his fare on the defendant road, and also sufficient to pay for a transfer check to the Metropolitan road, which he received in due form. He told the conductor that he wished for a check to take him over the Dover Street line, which the conductor promised to give him when they arrived at the proper place for changing cars. At the corner of Dorchester Avenue and Broadway he left said car, and, as he left, the conductor handed him the last-named check, by mistake, in place of the first-named. After waiting a short time, a Dover Street car came along, which he entered, and rode as far as the bridge, when the conductor of the car came for his fare, and he tendered him said check. The conductor refused to accept it, (though the plaintiff informed him of the circumstances under which he received it, as above stated,) and required him to pay a fare or leave the car. The plaintiff refused to pay a fare, and was forced by said conductor to leave the car. No unnecessary force was used.

Upon these facts, the judge ruled that the plaintiff was not entitled to maintain his action, and found for the defendant.

Judgment for the defendant.

W. Howland, for the plaintiff.

J. C. Davis, for the defendant, cited Townsend v. New York Central & Hudson River Railroad, 56 N.Y. 295; Weaver v. Rome, Watertown & Ogdensburg Railroad, 3 Th. & C. 270; Petrie v. Pennsylvania Railroad, 13 Vroom 449; Frederick v. Marquette, Houghton & Ontonagon Railroad, 37 Mich. 342; Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. Griffin, 68 Ill. 499; Shelton v. Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway, 29 Ohio St. 214; Yorton v. Milwaukee, Lake Shore & Western Railway, 54 Wis. 234.

C. Allen J. Devens & W. Allen JJ.,...