Drennan v. Grady

• Decision Date: 11 January 1897
• Citation: 45 N.E. 741,167 Mass. 415
• Parties: DRENNAN v. GRADY.
• Court: United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court

167 Mass. 415

45 N.E. 741

DRENNAN v. GRADY.

Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Suffolk.

January 11, 1897

The facts, as recited in the bill of exceptions are as follows:

"The defendant is the proprietor of a liquor store situated at Maverick street, in that part of Boston called East Boston and said Maverick street runs almost east and west, the store being on the southerly side of said street. In the front of the store is the entrance, there being a large double door with two windows, the front of the store being almost entirely of glass. On the right of the door, upon entering, is an office, and running towards the rear of the store is a bar, which runs at right angles with said Maverick street. Almost opposite the end of the bar, in the rear of the store, and on the opposite side from the bar is a 'screen,' or 'cage,' so called, it being a portion of the floor inclosed with a wire fence about 6 feet high, which is used for the purpose of keeping liquors, cigars, and other merchandise in. At the end of the bar, near the inclosure, and about 21/2 feet from it, is an opening into the cellar, and this is covered by a trapdoor, which has a ring in it, and which, when open, swings backward towards the wall on the westerly side of the store, but not near enough to clear it. This trapdoor is about 30 inches in width, and about 4 feet in length. Between the wall of the store and the wired inclosure is an open space, and at the end of the store is a window, opposite which window is a water closet and urinal. There is also a window in the opposite side of the room opening into this wire inclosure, and a window in front of the bar. It appeared in evidence that only the space in front of the bar is used by the general public and customers of the defendant when they come in there, and this trapdoor is in a part of the store not frequented or used by customers,--only those going towards said water closet or urinal. There was evidence tending to show that the water closet and urinal were provided and adapted for use by customers of the defendant who came to his store, and that the urinal, at least, was generally and frequently used by the different customers, with the consent of the defendant. The defendant's evidence tended to show that the water closet was kept locked, and that the customers could use it only upon application for the key, which was left in charge of the bartender; but the testimony of the plaintiff was that on the day in question it was unlocked, and one other witness for the plaintiff also testified that he had, at another time, visited the water closet, and found it unlocked. The trapdoor in question was located at the end of the counter or bar, and directly in the course of a person going to or from the water closet or urinal. On the easterly side of the store is an alley or narrow street, about 25 or 30 feet wide, and in the rear of the store is considerable space through which the light comes unobstructed to the windows above mentioned. It appeared that, on or about the 4th day of April, 1894, the plaintiff, who was then a man of about 65 years of age, and had been for years employed as a boiler maker, and had grown quite deaf, went into said premises of the defendant. The plaintiff testified that he went into the place about the middle of the forenoon, for the purpose of attending to a call of nature, and that, a short time after he entered, he bought and paid for a glass of beer from one of the servants of the defendant, named Moran, who was standing behind the

...