Daignault v. Berkshire St. Ry. Co.

Decision Date02 December 1931
Citation178 N.E. 653,277 Mass. 227
PartiesDAIGNAULT v. BERKSHIRE STREET RY. CO. (three cases).
CourtUnited States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Exceptions from Supreme Judicial Court, Berkshire County; W. A. Burns, Judge.

Actions by Alice Daignault, p. p. a., and by Arthur Daignault, and by Arthur Daignault, administrator, against the Berkshire Street Railway Company. Verdicts for plaintiffs, and defendant brings exceptions.

Exceptions sustained, and judgment for defendant.

E. K. McPeck, of Adams, P. J. Ashe, of North Adams, and F. W. Cassidy, of Adams, for plaintiff.

C. H. Wright, of Pittsfield, and W. J. Donovan, of Adams, for defendant.

CROSBY, J.

These are three actions of tort to recover for personal injuries received on July 15, 1926, as the result of a collision of the plaintiffs with an electric car of the defendant on Massachusetts avenue, in North Adams. Arthur Daignault will hereafter be referred to as the plaintiff.

On the day in question the plaintiff, accompanied by his two children, Alice, then about three and one-half years of age, and Francis, then about four and one-half years of age, had paid a visit to his mother who lived with his brother at No. 1665 Massachusetts avenue, which is located on the northerly side of the highway. The plaintiff testified that he started with the children to leave for his home in Adams at 7:40 p. m. and was on the piazza of his brother's house with the children where he remained five or six minutes; that when he saw the car he intended to take coming around the curve at the top of the hill he started down the steps, holding each child by the hand. A path from the steps led down to the street railway track, which was located on the extreme northerly side of the street, and it was necessary for him to cross the track in order to board the car. From the steps to the nearer or northerly rail of the track was seventeen feet and six inches. The plaintiff testified that when he was half way down the path he saw the car a second time; that it was then near a white pole marked (1) on the plan. There was evidence that this pole was located one hundred and sixty-five feet and six inches from the piazza. The plaintiff further testified that after he saw the car at this time he ‘kept on walking down the path, over the rail, going onto the highway’; that he had plenty of time to cross the track to go to the post; that as he was stepping over the northerly rail the trolley car hit him; that no whistle was sounded, but he could hear the noise of the approaching car and heard it all the time; and that when he last looked the car was in full view of him. The highest rate of speed of the car as shown by the evidence from the time it was first seen until it reached the place of the accident was twenty miles an hour, and it was brought to a full stop in about two car lengths from the place where the collision occurred.

The undisputed evidence showed that when the accident occurred it was daylight and the weather was clear; that there was no traffic on the highway at the time and place of the accident; that there was nothing to...

To continue reading

Request your trial
15 cases
  • Gechijian v. Richmond Ins. Co.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
    • February 1, 1940
    ...254 Mass. 204, 150 N.E. 5;Mailhot v. New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad, 273 Mass. 277, 173 N.E. 422;Daignault v. Berkshire Street Railway, 277 Mass. 227, 178 N.E. 653;Brennan v. Schuster, 288 Mass. 311, 192 N.E. 835. We must take that view of the evidence most favorable to the plainti......
  • Finn v. Eastern Massachusetts St. Ry. Co.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
    • May 20, 1932
    ...230 Mass. 392, 119 N. E. 762;Hurd v. Eastern Massachusetts Street Railway, 254 Mass. 204, 150 N. E. 5, and Daignault v. Berkshire Street Railway, 277 Mass. 227, 178 N. E. 653. Exceptions ...
  • Tucker v. Ryan
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
    • September 17, 1937
    ...236 Mass. 130, 134, 127 N.E. 632;Gallagher v. Johnson, 237 Mass. 455, 457, 130 N.E. 174, 15 A.L.R. 411;Daignault v. Berkshire Street Railway Co., 277 Mass. 227, 230, 178 N.E. 653, and cases cited. McKenna v. Andreassi (Mass.) 197 N.E. 879. See Capano v. Melchionno (Mass.) 7 N.E.(2d) 593. Th......
  • Callahan v. Boston Elevated Ry. Co.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
    • April 7, 1934
    ...defendant to prove this was not sustained. The case is very close to the line. It is distinguishable from Daignault v. Berkshire Street Railway Co., 277 Mass. 227, 178 N. E. 653, and cases there cited. It is distinguishable also from Sullivan v. Boston Elevated Railway Co., 283 Mass. 507, 1......
  • 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