Staples v. Boston & M. R. R
| Decision Date | 05 May 1908 |
| Citation | 69 A. 890,74 N.H. 499 |
| Parties | STAPLES v. BOSTON & M. R. R. |
| Court | New Hampshire Supreme Court |
Transferred from Superior Court, Strafford County; Wallace, Judge.
Case for loss of property by fire by Jacob F. Staples against the Boston & Maine Railroad. Motions for nonsuit and for the direction of a verdict in favor of defendant were denied, and defendant excepts. Overruled.
Mathews & Stevens, for plaintiff. Kivel & Hughes, for defendant.
The principal contention of the defendant is that reasonable men could not find, as claimed by the plaintiff, that a locomotive passed over the track near the plaintiff's buildings about 10 o'clock on the evening of the fire, which occurred about midnight, because the record kept by the defendant of the movement of its trains indicated that the last train over the road before the fire passed that point some four hours before. In view of the fact that several of the plaintiff's witnesses testified that they heard a train in that vicinity at about 10 o'clock in the evening, the question presented relates merely to the weight to be attached to the evidence. There is no rule of law that makes the train sheets conclusive proof of the movements of trains; and it cannot be said as a matter of law that the jury, upon a consideration of all the evidence, might not reasonably find that a train passed the plaintiff's premises at about 10 o'clock.
There was other evidence that the stubble on the declivity between the track and the end of the barn had been burned; that the fire extended to a pile of boards near the end of the barn, where the fire was first discovered; and that a brisk westerly wind arose about that time, which, fanning the smouldering fire, would naturally cause it to run toward the barn. Finding that the fire which destroyed the plaintiff's buildings started in the dry grass by the side of the track and then worked its way up to the barn, the jury might also find that it was set by a spark from the locomotive which passed by at 10 o'clock, in the absence of any other reasonable explanation of its origin. The fact that locomotives frequently emit sparks which fall near the track causing fires is some evidence that where the grass or undergrowth near a track is on fire, and trains have passed along within an hour or two, the fire was caused by sparks from a locomotive. It is not a mere conjecture, but may be a reasonable inference from the facts proved.
Exceptions overruled. All...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Russell v. Boston & M. R. R.
...common knowledge of "the fact that locomotives frequently emit sparks which fall near the tracks causing fires" (Staples v. Railroad, 74 N. H. 499, 500, 69 A. 890, 891) furnishes a sufficient, logical, and legal basis for the conclusion. But the height to which sparks can be thrown and the ......
-
State v. Boston & M.R.R.
...Railroad, 64 N.H. 545, 15 A. 143; Bailey Lumber Co. v. Boston & M. Railroad, 78 N.H. 94, 97 A. 555. In 1908 in Staples v. Boston & M. Railroad, 74 N.H. 499, 500, 69 A. 890, 891, appeared the following statement on which the plaintiffs rely: 'The fact that locomotives frequently emit sparks ......
-
Kimberly F. v. Mary Hitchcock Memorial Hosp.
...we think that the jury were justified in finding it to be more probable than otherwise that the fire resulted from this cause. Staples v. Railroad, 74 N.H. 499. "It is not a case of conjecture between equal possibilities, but the ordinary determination of a conclusion from inferences suppor......
-
Emery v. Tilo Roofing Co., Inc.
...that the jury were justified in finding it to be more probable that) otherwise that the fire resulted from this cause. Staples v. Boston Railroad, 74 N.H. 499, 69 A. 890. "It is not a case of conjecture between equal possibilities, but the ordinary determination of a conclusion from inferen......