Scott v. Boston Elevated Ry. Co.

CourtUnited States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts
Writing for the CourtDOLAN
Citation60 N.E.2d 5,318 Mass. 31
Decision Date05 March 1945
PartiesSCOTT v. BOSTON ELEVATED RY. CO. (two cases).

318 Mass. 31
60 N.E.2d 5

SCOTT
v.
BOSTON ELEVATED RY.
CO. (two cases).

Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Suffolk.

March 5, 1945.


Exceptions from Superior Court, Suffolk County; Buttrick, Judge.

Actions of tort by Bruce Scott, a minor, and Alexander Scott, respectively, against the Boston Elevated Railway Company for personal injuries to minor plaintiff and consequential damages. Defendant's motions for directed verdicts were allowed, and plaintiffs bring exceptions.

Exceptions overruled.

[60 N.E.2d 5]

Before FIELD, C. J., and LUMMUS, QUA, DOLAN, and SPALDING, JJ.

T. H. Mahony and R. F. Roach, both of Boston, for plaintiffs.


S. C. Rand and F. R. Johnson, both of Boston, for defendant.

DOLAN, Justice.

These are actions of tort to recover in the first case compensation for personal injuries sustained by the minor plaintiff, and in the second case consequential damages. At the conclusion of the evidence the judge allowed the defendant's motion for a directed verdict in each case, and the plaintiffs duly excepted.

The evidence in its aspect most favorable to the plaintiffs would have warranted the jury in finding the following facts. On June 6, 1941, at about 7:30 P. M., the minor plaintiff, hereinafter referred to as the plaintiff, who was then ‘going on’ twelve years of age, left his home on East Newton Street, in Boston, to go to the Boys Club, located on Washington Street next to the Salvation Army building, near East Brookline Street. He got on the bus, which was then just starting up, ‘going just a little bit,’ and was bound intown, at the corner of East Newton Street. He did not get into the bus and paid no fare. He was ‘hooking a ride’ on the outside of the bus, holding onto a window which was partly open, the second window from the front end on the right of the driver. He knew that was ‘wrong.’ He was facing toward the side of the bus. He had one foot, he thought the right foot, on the right front ‘wheel fender.’ The bus went by Blackstone Park. He was still hanging on. The bus stopped at the Salvation Army Hotel (at the corner of East Brookline Street) and people got on the bus. Proceeding intown, the bus passed Canton Street and slowed down, and he jumped off. He ran a couple of steps and bumped into an automobile, and fell down in back of the wheels of the bus. ‘The bus could not stop right there because cars were parked, so it went in between the poles [uprights of the Elevated structure] and out in between * * * [them] and as it did...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 practice notes
  • Pridgen v. Boston Housing Authority
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts
    • March 5, 1974
    ...he is permitted to recover in engligence against the defendant; if the latter, he is barred from recovery. Scott v. Boston Elev. Ry., 318 Mass. 31, 33--34, 60 N.E.2d 5 This distinction between 'condition' and 'proximate cause' is one which we have used frequently in cases where the plaintif......
  • Falmouth Nat. Bank v. Ticor Title Ins. Co., No. 90-1335
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (1st Circuit)
    • September 7, 1990
    ...as a whole in order to effectuate its overall purpose. Cullen Enter., Inc., 399 Mass. at 900 n. 27, 507 N.E.2d at 725 n. 27; Ober, 318 Mass. at 31, 60 N.E.2d at 91 (1945); see Lawyers Title Ins. Corp., 361 F.2d at 768. The corollary of this rule is that whenever possible, each word in an in......
  • Ferris v. Monsanto Co.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts
    • May 21, 1980
    ...Aldrich, 168 Mass. 15, 46 N.E. 115 (1897). 6 See Marengo v. Roy, 318 Mass. 719, 721, 63 N.E.2d 893 (1945); Scott v. Boston Elevated Ry., 318 Mass. 31, 33, 60 N.E.2d 5 (1945); Falardeau v. Malden & Melrose Gas Light Co., 275 Mass. 196, 199, 175 N.E. 471 (1931). It is suggested in Marengo tha......
  • Dobb v. Baker, No. 74-1164
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (1st Circuit)
    • November 6, 1974
    ...on the latter's property. See, e.g., Chronopoulos v. Gil Wyner Co., 334 Mass. 593, 137 N.E.2d 667 (1956); Scott v. Boston Elevated Ry., 318 Mass. 31, 60 N.E.2d 5 (1945). Under this standard there could be no recovery upon the undisputed facts The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court recentl......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
6 cases
  • Pridgen v. Boston Housing Authority
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts
    • March 5, 1974
    ...he is permitted to recover in engligence against the defendant; if the latter, he is barred from recovery. Scott v. Boston Elev. Ry., 318 Mass. 31, 33--34, 60 N.E.2d 5 This distinction between 'condition' and 'proximate cause' is one which we have used frequently in cases where the plaintif......
  • Falmouth Nat. Bank v. Ticor Title Ins. Co., No. 90-1335
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (1st Circuit)
    • September 7, 1990
    ...as a whole in order to effectuate its overall purpose. Cullen Enter., Inc., 399 Mass. at 900 n. 27, 507 N.E.2d at 725 n. 27; Ober, 318 Mass. at 31, 60 N.E.2d at 91 (1945); see Lawyers Title Ins. Corp., 361 F.2d at 768. The corollary of this rule is that whenever possible, each word in an in......
  • Ferris v. Monsanto Co.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts
    • May 21, 1980
    ...Aldrich, 168 Mass. 15, 46 N.E. 115 (1897). 6 See Marengo v. Roy, 318 Mass. 719, 721, 63 N.E.2d 893 (1945); Scott v. Boston Elevated Ry., 318 Mass. 31, 33, 60 N.E.2d 5 (1945); Falardeau v. Malden & Melrose Gas Light Co., 275 Mass. 196, 199, 175 N.E. 471 (1931). It is suggested in Marengo tha......
  • Dobb v. Baker, No. 74-1164
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (1st Circuit)
    • November 6, 1974
    ...on the latter's property. See, e.g., Chronopoulos v. Gil Wyner Co., 334 Mass. 593, 137 N.E.2d 667 (1956); Scott v. Boston Elevated Ry., 318 Mass. 31, 60 N.E.2d 5 (1945). Under this standard there could be no recovery upon the undisputed facts The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court recentl......
  • 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