Higgins v. Dewey
Cases that cite this one
38 later published cases cite this decision. The 25 that cite it most often are listed here.
- Commonwealth v. Rhoades (Mass. 1980)
- Deerfoot Farms, Inc. v. New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad (Mass. 1951)
- Gates v. Boston & Maine Railroad (Mass. 1926)
- Krippner v. Biebl (Minn. 1881)
- Commonwealth v. Harris (Mass. App. Ct. 1973)
- Gibson v. Garcia (Cal. Ct. App. 1950)
- Newlin v. New England Telephone & Telegraph Co. (Mass. 1944)
- Phillips v. Batchelder Whittemore Coal Co. (Mass. Dist. Ct., App. Div. 1939)
- Herrick v. City of Springfield (Mass. 1934)
- Bratton v. Rudnick (Mass. 1933)
- Houston v. Elrod (Ala. 1919)
- Kansas City, M. & O. Ry. Co. v. Blackstone (Tex. App. 1919)
- Casson v. Schoenfeld (Wis. 1918)
- Bradford v. Boston & Maine Railroad (Mass. 1916)
- Wallace v. New York, New Haven, & Hartford Railroad (Mass. 1911)
- Mahaffey v. J. L. Rumbarger Lumber Co. (W. Va. 1907)
- Harrison v. Kansas City Electric Light Co. (Mo. 1906)
- Fishburn v. Burlington & Northwestern Railway Co. (Iowa 1905)
- Craft v. . Timber Co. (N.C. 1903)
- Craft v. Albemarle Timber Co. (N.C. 1903)
- Flynn v. Boston Electric Light Co. (Mass. 1898)
- Lieuallen v. Mosgrove (Or. 1898)
- Pulsifer v. Berry (Me. 1895)
- Ulrick v. Dakota Loan & Trust Co. (S.D. 1892)
- Brummit v. Furness (Ind. Ct. App. 1891)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
The instructions requested were rightly refused, and the instructions given were correct and sufficient. A man who negligently sets fire on his-own land, and keeps it negligently, is liable to an action at common law for any injury done by the spreading or communication of the fire directly from his own land to the property of another, whether through the air or along the ground, and whether he might or might not have reasonably anticipated the particular manner and direction in which it is actually communicated. Tubervil v. Stamp, 1 Salk. 13; 2 Salk. 726; 1 Ld. Raym. 264; 3 Ld. Raym. 375; Com. 32; Comb. 459; Skin. 681; 12 Mod. 152; Carth. 425; Holt, 9. Filliter v. Phippard, 11 Q. B. 347. Barnard v. Poor, 21 Pick. 378. Perley v. Eastern Railroad Co. 98 Mass. 414.
The testimony of Wells was rightly excluded, because it related to an immaterial question, and to a subject within the common knowledge of the jury. White v. Ballou, 8 Allen, 408. Luce v. Dorchester Insurance Co. 105 Mass. 297.
Pxeeptions overruled.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.