Citation Numbers: 28 A.2d 844, 129 Conn. 392, 1942 Conn. LEXIS 253
Judges: Maltbie, Jennings, Ells, Dickenson, Inglis
Filed Date: 11/10/1942
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 11/3/2024
The plaintiff brought this action to recover for injuries suffered when he fell in a passenger *Page 393
coach of a train operated by the defendant trustees. The jury rendered a verdict in his favor and he has appealed from the ruling of the trial court setting it aside. His claim is that as he rose to leave his seat one foot was caught between a footrest attached to the seat in front of him and some mechanism under that seat and he was thrown to the floor of the car by the lurching of the train as it was coming to a stop. He charges the defendants with negligence in the way in which the footrest and mechanism were constructed and in the lurching and jolting of the car. The uncontradicted evidence was that the car was a modern air-cooled coach, that the same type of construction was used in about fifty coaches delivered to the defendants by the manufacturer and in coaches in use on several other large railroads and that no accident caused by the mechanism in question had ever been reported to the defendants' claim agent who had supervision of all claims arising in Connecticut. These circumstances furnish strong evidence that there was no negligence on the part of the defendants in using the type of construction embodied in the coach. Godfrey v. Connecticut Co.,
There is no error.
Firszt v. Capitol Park Realty Co. , 98 Conn. 627 ( 1923 )
Miller v. Poli's New England Theatres, Inc. , 125 Conn. 610 ( 1939 )
Rosenthal v. New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad , 88 Conn. 65 ( 1914 )
Godfrey v. Connecticut Co. , 98 Conn. 63 ( 1922 )
Belledeau v. Connecticut Co. , 110 Conn. 625 ( 1930 )
Dibble v. New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad , 100 Conn. 130 ( 1923 )
Wray v. Fairfield Amusement Co. , 126 Conn. 221 ( 1940 )