Pearson v. Director Gen. of Railroads.
| Decision Date | 23 May 1923 |
| Parties | LALLA M. PEARSON v. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF RAILROADS. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
March 23, 1923.
Present: RUGG, C.
J., DE COURCY CROSBY, PIERCE, & CARROLL, JJ.
Negligence Railroad: station.
An action cannot be maintained by one who, while in the waiting room of a station of a railroad in a large city, is knocked down and injured by a third person, where it does not appear that such conduct of the third person reasonably could have been anticipated and guarded against by those in charge and control of the station.
In an action of the character above described, the only evidence was testimony of the plaintiff, a woman, and of her husband, which tended to show that she was knocked down by a third person after she had come from a toilet room and was six or eight feet from a partition that separated it from the main waiting room of the station. Near the partition was a main entrance to the station adjoining steps leading to a station of an elevated railway.
Subject to an exception by the defendant, the judge left to the jury a special question, whether the partition before the toilet room was a contributing cause of the accident, and the jury answered the question affirmatively. Held, that there was no evidence warranting the answer to the question and that it should not have been left to the jury.
In the action above described, there also was evidence tending to show that the plaintiff fell near a "bubble" drinking fountain and upon a wet place on the floor of the station, but there was no evidence tending to show that she slipped by reason of the wet condition of the floor or how long such condition had been in existence; and it was held that the evidence as to the condition of the floor would not warrant a finding of negligence on the part of the defendant.
TORT for personal injuries received by the plaintiff in the North Station of the Boston and Maine Railroad on October 17, 1919. Writ dated July 16, 1920.
In the Superior Court, the action was tried before Cox, J. Material evidence is described in the opinion. At the close of the evidence the defendant moved that a verdict be ordered in its favor (1) because there was not sufficient evidence to justify a finding of negligence on the part of the defendant or of any of its agents or servants and (2) because the evidence showed that the plaintiff was not in the exercise of due care. The motion was denied. The defendant also saved an exception to a part of the charge that allowed the jury to take into consideration the partition or screen, described in the opinion, as a cause of the accident.
The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff in the sum of $1,000. Before the verdict was recorded, the judge reserved leave to enter a verdict for the defendant if this court should be of the opinion that such verdict should be entered. He then reported the action to this court for determination.
J. M. O'Donoghue, for the defendant.
G. W. Pearson, (F.
H. Pearson with him,) for the plaintiff.
The plaintiff properly was allowed to amend her pleadings by substituting John Barton Payne, Director General of Railroads for the corporation originally named as defendant, and later by the substitution of James C. Davis, Director General of Railroads in place of his predecessor in that office. Aetna Mills v. Director General of
Railroads, 242 Mass. 255 . Genga v. Director General of Railroads, 243 Mass. 101.
The action is brought to recover for personal injuries received by the plaintiff in the waiting room of the station of the Boston and Maine Railroad in Boston, where she went for the purpose of taking a train for Lowell. The only witnesses who testified at the trial were the plaintiff and her husband. Just before the accident the plaintiff had been to the ladies' toilet room which is at the extreme southeasterly corner of the waiting room; the entrances to the waiting room are from Causeway Street on the southerly side. The door of the toilet room is screened by a wooden partition which extends from the southerly wall of the waiting room eighteen or twenty feet in a line parallel to and about eight feet distant from the easterly wall; the most easterly entrance to the room from the street is next to the partition and at the foot of the stairs leading to and from the elevated station. On the easterly wall of the waiting room, and six or eight feet northerly from the end of the partition, there is a "bubble" fountain. The plaintiff testified that she came out of the ladies' toilet room and proceeded to walk to the train shed in the rear of the station; that beyond the partition there were benches parallel to the easterly wall of the station; that those nearest the partition were about six feet from it; that she was walking between the benches and the fountain, and was almost opposite the latter at the time of the accident; that the floor in that vicinity was wet "that something hit her; that she thinks that it was a man, as one stopped for a minute; that she did not see him before being struck; that the first thing she knew she was sitting on the floor facing the back of the station; that she found she couldn't stand and that she was helped to a seat on one of the benches." She also testified that she was taken to a hospital, and the next day was carried to her home and was confined to her bed for several months; that the man who had hit her stopped and begged her pardon and stayed for a few moments, she thinks, but she was so dazed she does not know; that she really does not know what hit her, but she "felt something hit her on the back and found herself sitting on the floor." The...
To continue reading
Request your trial