Creavin v. Newton St. Ry. Co.
| Decision Date | 06 September 1900 |
| Citation | 57 N.E. 994,176 Mass. 529 |
| Parties | CREAVIN et al. v. NEWTON ST. RY. CO. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
M. J. Connolly and Robert Levi, for plaintiffs.
George L. Mayberry and Thomas J. Kenny, for defendant.
The only question in this case is whether there was evidence that the plaintiffs were in the exercise of due care. The plaintiffs were injured by a collision between their wagon and an electric car. The plaintiff Creavin was an expressman and was driving with the plaintiff Connors, who was employed by him, in an ordinary covered express cart, northeasterly up Pine street, to cross River street, in West Newton, at about half past 8 o'clock on the evening of December 22d. The electric cars run on the southerly side of River street close to the sidewalk on that side of the street. Pine street intersects River street at an angle of 45 degrees. The electric car which struck the plaintiffs was going east. The plaintiffs' wagon was struck about the rear of the forward wheels. The body of the wagon was thrown to the right, and the horse and forward wheels to the left. It was a fair, starlight night. The plaintiffs were driving at a walk when they were struck. There was evidence in this case on which the jury could have found that both plaintiffs looked to see if a car was coming, when, seated as they were in the wagon, they were 15 feet from the track; that their view was abstructed until they reached that point; that they saw the car, and each thought that it was then 100 to 105 feet away and that in fect the car was then about 100 feet away; that they thought they had ample time to cross the tracks, and for that reason drove across at a walk; and, finally, that the car was being driven at the rate of 15 to 17 miles an hour in place of 8 miles an hour, as the city ordinance required. These facts would authorize a finding that the plaintiffs thought that the motorman saw them, and would look out for them, and that they were in the exercise of due care, whether their estimates were right or not. Moreover, it will be found, by making the necessary computations, that their estimates were right; that is to say, if the car was 100 feet away when the plaintiffs, seated in the wagon, were 15 feet from the track, the plaintiffs, driving at the rate of 3 1/2 miles an hour, would have got across the tracks without a collision if the car had come at the...
To continue reading
Request your trial