Rhoades v. New York Cent. & H.R.R.R.
| Citation | 116 N.E. 244,227 Mass. 138 |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts |
| Decision Date | 26 May 1917 |
| Parties | RHOADES v. NEW YORK CENT. & H. R. R. R. |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Exceptions from Superior Court, Middlesex County; Patrick M. Keating, Judge.
Action by Eva L. B. Rhoades, administratrix, against the New York Central & Hudson River Railroad. Verdict for plaintiff, and defendant excepts. Exceptions sustained.
This was a tort action to recover damages for death of plaintiff's intestate, who was a conductor in a train of defendant used exclusively for the American Express Company. The train had been stopped because of defect in coupling and plaintiff's intestate, having stepped on another track, was run down by another train and killed.J. E. Hannigan and W. F. People, both of Boston, for plaintiff.
G. L. Mayberry and L. A. Mayberry, both of Boston, for defendant.
This is an action of tort brought by the plaintiff under the federal Employers' Liability Act, to recover damages for the death of her husband, Justin W. Rhoades, a conductor in the employ of the defendant.
Upon the issue whether the parties were engaged in interstate commerce in the operation of the train at the time of the injury to the intestate, the plaintiff introduced the testimony of Edward J. Pierce, a messenger of the American Express Company, in substance to the effect that he had a book, made up by himself while on the train, which tells the valuable packages that are left at the different stations; that these packages are accompanied by waybills; that each package had a waybill and was copied onto the book from the waybill; that he made the entries on this book from waybills he received; that the only information he had with reference to the place where any of the packages came from was the information he got from the waybill corresponding with the name and sticker on the package; that whatever was on the surface of the package in the way of names and stickers and whatever there was on the waybills was the entire source of information from which he made the entries; that he knew nothing about what any package contained or about where it came from except the information he got from the package itself and the waybill.
Subject to the exception of the defendant the witness testified, that on December 24, 1912, certain packages came from outside the state and were delivered within the state; that he ‘left one package from West Shore Depot, New York, a sealed package at West Newton; from Albany, New York, a package that went down to Newton Centre, and from West Shore, New York, a package of cigars; from West Shore again a sealed package for West Newton, signed for by A....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hunter v. Totman
...applies to 'an entry in an account * * * book.'' Kaplan v. Gross, 223 Mass. 152, 154, 111 N.E. 853, 855; Rhoades v. New York Central & H. R. R. Co., 227 Mass. 138, 116 N.E. 244. The plaintiff Hunter relies in his brief on the case of Manufacturers' Nat. Bank v. Hollingsworth & Whitney Co., ......
-
Chadwick & Carr Co. v. Smith
...to the issue on trial. See Bursaw v. Pederson, 284 Mass. 471, 476, 477, 188 N.E. 233. The case of Rhoades v. New York Central & Hudson River Railroad Co., 227 Mass. 138, 116 N.E. 244, and other cases in this jurisdiction relied on by the defendant were decided before the scope of the statut......
-
Dorr v. Massachusetts Title Ins. Co.
...the time it was made and to use it to refresh his memory. Kaplan v. Gross, 223 Mass. 152, 111 N. E. 853;Rhoades v. New York Central & Hudson River Railroad, 227 Mass. 138, 116 N. E. 244. The assessors' valuation of the property was not admissible to determine its value. Commonwealth v. Quin......
-
Cali v. Caliri
...adjudications. Riley v. Boehm, 167 Mass. 183, 45 N. E. 84;Kaplan v. Gross, 223 Mass. 152, 111 N. E. 853;Rhoades v. New York Central & Hudson River Railroad, 227 Mass. 138, 116 N. E. 244;Dorr v. Massachusetts Title Ins. Co., 238 Mass. 490, 496, 131 N. E. 191,G. L. c. 233, § 78. [3] The other......