Snowden v. Boston & M.R. Co.
| Decision Date | 27 February 1890 |
| Citation | 24 N.E. 40,151 Mass. 220 |
| Parties | SNOWDEN v. BOSTON & M.R. CO. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
B. Wadleigh, for plaintiff.
Strout & Coolidge and W.I. Badger, for defendant.
In considering whether, as matter of law, the plaintiff has failed to show that she was in the exercise of due care, and was thus guilty of negligence which contributed to the injury which she sustained, it is to be considered, whatever contradictions may exist, that the testimony offered by herself and on her behalf was that which was relied upon by the jury. According to this, "when she reached the forward platform of the rear car" of the train upon which she took passage for Boston, "she mounted the steps thereof as fast as she could, and as she mounted the steps she glanced into the rear car, and as it looked full she turned about and looked into the forward car, and as said car did not look as full she proceeded, while the train was at rest, to pass forward to the car next in front of said rear car; that in passing over to the forward car without looking to see where she stepped, just as the train started she placed her foot on the buffers between said cars; and that when the cars started the buffers opened, and her foot slipped down between the buffers, and her great toe was caught and jammed." There was evidence from the plaintiff or her witnesses that she had been lame for many years; that she often traveled on this train; that it made a shorter stop than usual; that it started with a jerk; that the distance between the two rear cars was about six inches that there was nothing to prevent the plaintiff from stepping from one platform to the other; and that the tops of the buffers were nearly on a level with the platforms of the cars. These buffers were iron plates attached to the ends of rods running beneath the cars, and lengthwise thereof, which played upon each other as the train moved, by means of spiral strings attached to the ends of said rods, the play between the buffers being about two inches. The cars were properly constructed and equipped, and the platforms thereof and buffers were in good condition at the time of the injury.
That the plaintiff was guilty of negligence in merely endeavoring to pass from one car to the other while the train was not in motion, when the distance was only six inches, if proper precautions had been taken, could not fairly be contended. But she did so without looking to see where she stepped, and she had been...
To continue reading
Request your trial