Sandler v. Boston Elevated Ry. Co.

• Decision Date: 07 March 1921
• Citation: 238 Mass. 148,130 N.E. 104
• Parties: SANDLER v. BOSTON ELEVATED RY. CO.
• Court: United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court

238 Mass. 148

130 N.E. 104

SANDLER

v.BOSTON ELEVATED RY. CO.

Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Middlesex.

March 7, 1921.

Report from Superior Court, Middlesex County; Louis S. Cox, Judge.

Action by Esther Sandler against the Boston Elevated Railway Company, resulting in directed verdict for defendant by agreement. On report in accordance with such agreement to the Supreme Judicial Court. Verdict ordered to stand.

Daniel H. Coakley and William H. Lewis, both of Boston, for plaintiff.

Pitt F. Drew and Charles S. Walkup, Jr., both of Boston, for defendant.

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff, a passenger seated within one of the defendant's trolley cars ‘going fast’ on a public street, ‘heard a crash and the car gave a bang and I fell right down on the floor’ of the car and received injuries. Other witnesses testified that at intersecting streets an automobile truck was in collision with and in front of the trolley car. There was no evidence concerning the manner in which the truck and car came into collision. There is nothing in these facts to show any negligence on the part of the defendant. The doctrine of res ipsa loquitur has no application to these facts. The case is within the authority of many decisions. Niland v. Boston Elev. Ry., 213 Mass. 522, 100 N. E. 554;Stangy v. Boston Elev. Ry., 220 Mass. 414, 107 N. E. 933;McNiff v. Boston Elevated Ry., 234 Mass. 352, 125 N. E. 391. The case is plainly distinguishable from Magee v. New York, New Haven & Hartford R. R., 195 Mass. 113, 80 N. E. 689,Doherty v. Boston & Northern Ry., 207 Mass. 27, 92 N. E. 1026, and cases of that nature on which the plaintiff relies.

Verdict to stand.