Cleveland v. Bangor St. Ry.

Decision Date14 February 1894
Citation29 A. 1005,86 Me. 232
PartiesCLEVELAND v. BANGOR ST. RAILWAY.
CourtMaine Supreme Court

Exceptions from supreme judicial court, Penobscot county.

Action by Lena T. Cleveland against the Bangor Street Railway. There was a verdict for plaintiff, to which defendant took exceptions, and moves for a new trial. Exceptions and motion overruled.

This was an action on the case for injuries which the plaintiff alleges she sustained September 18, 1892, through the negligence of the defendant in erecting and maintaining a pole for the support of its trolley wires upon Exchange street, in the city of Bangor.

Declaration: "In a plea of the case, for that, whereas there now is, and was at said Bangor, on the 18th day of September, last past, a public street and highway called 'Exchange Street,' in said Bangor, on and over which all citizens are entitled to pass and repass with their horses and carriages, and said plaintiff was in a carriage on the said 18th day of September, and was driving through said street, and was in the exercise of due care, and with a suitable carriage, harness, and horse, in said highway, nearly opposite the store of Stockwell, Adams & Co., there was an obstruction in said highway, to wit, a pole some twenty feet in height, standing out in said highway about eighteen inches from the curbstone; said pole being in front of said Stockwell, Adams & Co.'s store, as aforesaid; said pole having been erected and was then being used by said defendant corporation for the purpose of propelling its electric cars through said street or highway.

"And, said plaintiff driving, as aforesaid, in a carriage, the horse that was drawing said carriage, though perfectly kind and manageable, was caused to shy by reason of a car suddenly turning the corner of Washington street, so-called, in said city, and coming out on said Exchange street; said car belonging to said defendant corporation.

"The carriage in which said plaintiff was riding was thrown against said pole, situated as aforesaid, and she was thrown out and severely injured, by having been dragged under the carriage, and getting a cut on her forehead, a wound on left arm, and receiving a severe wound on right knee, right arm, and right leg below the knee, and she was otherwise severely injured; and the plaintiff avers that said pole was unlawfully and negligently made, erected, and used by said defendant corporation in said highway at said place, and was then and there an unlawful obstruction of said highway, and said tipping of said carriage and said injuries to plaintiff were caused wholly by and solely by said obstruction and defect in said highway, and that she was in the exercise of due care; and the plaintiff avers that by said injury, caused as aforesaid, she has suffered great bodily pain, has been put to expense of physicians and attendance, and has lost her ability to work."

Plea, general Issue. The jury returned a verdict of $868 for the plaintiff, and the defendant took exceptions, and moved for a new trial.

The city ordinance of Bangor is as follows (chapter 40, § 1): "Bangor Street Railway, a corporation duly established by law, * * * is hereby authorized and licensed to locate, build, equip and maintain a street railway in the city of Bangor, for the sole purpose of transporting passengers and their baggage, cars to be run by electrical or animal power, and to locate and maintain single or double lines of poles on any street where its tracks may be laid," etc.

"Section 3...

To continue reading

Request your trial
8 cases
  • Pugh v. Texarkana Light & Traction Co.
    • United States
    • Arkansas Supreme Court
    • March 16, 1908
    ...& Streets, § 779; 67 N.E. 921; 93 S.W. 1057; 1 Thompson, Neg. §§ 1233, 1234; 2 Id. § 1347; 23 A. 281; 1 P. 253; 37 P. 1012; 33 F. 320; 29 A. 1005; 58 S. W: 508; 11 S.W. 2 Wood, Railroads, 970, § 269 note 1, 976; 19 S.W. 366; 27 S.W. 918; 27 S.W. 920; 37 A. 119; 1 Lewis, Em. Dom., 2 Ed., § 1......
  • Hayes v. New England Tel. & Tel. Co.
    • United States
    • New Hampshire Supreme Court
    • February 6, 1934
    ...of public safety in the use of the streets." The following eases support the general rule above stated: Cleveland v. Bangor Street Railway, 80 Me. 232, 29 A. 1005; Bevis v. Vanceburg Tel. Co., 121 Ky. 177, 89 S. W. 126; Wolfe v. Erie Tel. & Teleg. Co. (C. C.) 33 F. 320; Sheffield v. Central......
  • Clinkenbeard v. City of St. Joseph
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • October 3, 1928
    ...its poles along the street, and regardless of the pole being inside the curb. Stern v. International Ry. Co., 220 N.Y. 284; Cleveland v. Bangor Street Ry., 86 Me. 232; Lambert v. Westchester El. Ry., 191 N.Y. 248; McKin v. Philadelphia, 219 Pa. 243; Norwalk v. Jacobs, 27 Ohio Cir. Ct. 691; ......
  • Clinkenbeard v. City of St. Joseph
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • October 3, 1928
    ...its poles along the street, and regardless of the pole being inside the curb. Stern v. International Ry. Co., 220 N.Y. 284; Cleveland v. Bangor Street Ry., 86 Me. 232; Lambert v. Westchester El. Ry., 191 N.Y. 248; McKin v. Philadelphia, 219 Pa. 243; Norwalk v. Jacobs, 27 Ohio Cir. Ct. 691; ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT