Galligan v. Metacomet Manufacturing Co.
Cases that cite this one
14 later published cases cite this decision.
- Maher v. City of Casper (Wyo. 1950)
- Pastorello v. Stone (Conn. 1915)
- O'Hanley v. Norwood (Mass. Dist. Ct., App. Div. 1943)
- Bruso v. Eastern States Exposition (Mass. 1929)
- Hannan v. Ehrlich (Ohio 1921)
- Walker v. Fuller (Mass. 1916)
- Hillman v. Boston Elevated Railway Co. (Mass. 1911)
- Middleton v. Reutler (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1910)
- Davis v. Joslin Manufacturing Co. (R.I. 1908)
- McCann v. Thilemann (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York 1901)
- Shea v. Gurney (Mass. 1895)
- Stevens v. Nichols (Mass. 1892)
- Redigan v. Boston & Maine Railroad (Mass. 1891)
- Reardon v. Thompson (Mass. 1889)
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 plaintiff, a child seven years of age, seeks to recover damages from the defendant corporation for an injury sustained by her from falling down a precipitous place in a vacant lot where she was playing; the lot being in the rear of the premises where she lived, and separated therefrom by a picket fence, with a gate. But we are unable to find anything in the evidence reported which shows that the defendant owed, or in any way failed in, any duty to the plaintiff in respect to the condition of the lot. The only evidence tending to connect the defendant therewith was that the fence and gate were built by the defendant’s workmen about five years ago, and that the workmen had a key to the gate. There was no evidence to show that the defendant owned, or occupied, or had the care of the lot, or even that it had any right to place a fence along the brow of the precipice; or that, at the time of the accident, it used the road which leads through the gate, or left it open on the day of the accident; or that it ever, in any way, induced or invited the plaintiff or other children to come upon the vacant ground to play, or that either the defendant or any other corporation, or any person owning or occupying the lot, ever did anything more than merely to suffer and permit the use of the
Judgment on the verdict for the defendant.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.