Sullivan v. Boston & Albany R.R., 31 N.E. 128 (Mass. 1892). · Go Syfert
Search
Sullivan v. Boston & Albany R.R., 31 N.E. 128 (Mass. 1892). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
108 citation events (2 in the last 25 years) across 43 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: CHAM v. ECI MANAGEMENT CORPORATION (ga, 2021-03-15)
Treatment trajectory · 1905 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1905 1965 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 2 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) CHAM v. ECI MANAGEMENT CORPORATION (2×)
Ga. · 2021 · confidence medium
Candler, Inc., 22 Ga. App. 717, 717 ( 97 SE 112 ) (1918) (plaintiff was a licensee of the owner of an office building — where she was injured in the hallway — because undisputed facts showed that the plaintiff was visiting a business tenant inside the building to solicit a donation, as opposed to transacting business) (citing Plummer v. Dill, 31 NE 128, 128 (Mass. 1892) (plaintiff was licensee inside office building because she “did not go there to transact with any occupant of the building any kind of business in which he was engaged, or in the transaction of which the building was used…
cited Cited "see, e.g." Pettyjohn & Sons v. Basham
Va. · 1919 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also Plummer v. Bill, 156 Mass. 426 , 31 N. E. 128 , 32 Am.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Charles Sullivan
v.
Boston and Albany Railroad Company
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court.
May 9, 1892.
31 N.E. 128
1892 Mass. LEXIS 226
E. M. Johnson, for the plaintiff., W. Hudson, for the defendant.
Barker.
Cited by 12 opinions  |  Published
Barker, J.

It is useless to discuss the plaintiff’s exceptions to the exclusion of evidence, or to the refusal to submit the question of the due care of the plaintiff’s intestate to the jury, as in any aspect of the case, if the plaintiff’s intestate was not a trespasser, which we do not decide, he was at most a mere licensee, and so far as he was concerned the defendant had a right to arrange and use its property in any lawful manner, and owed him no duty with respect to it, except to refrain froni setting a trap for him, and from doing him intentional or wanton harm. Sweeny v. Old Colony & Newport Railroad, 10 Allen, 368, 372. Metcalfe v. Cunard Steamship Co. 147 Mass. 66. Heinlein v. Boston & Providence Railroad, 147 Mass. 136. Reardon v. Thompson, 149 Mass. 267. Daniels v. New York & New England Railroad, 154 Mass. 349, 354. Redigan v. Roston & Maine Railroad, 155 Mass. 44. The live electric wire with which the deceased came in contact was a lawful apparatus, used in the ordinary business of the defendant, and was not designed as a trap. Exceptions overruled.