Scribd
Upload
68 views8 pages

Walsh v. R. Co: 36 N.E. 584, Am. St. Rep. 514

Walsh, an employee of a railroad company in Connecticut, was injured by a broken draw-bar. He brought a tort action against the railroad company in Massachusetts. The Massachusetts trial court found that under its laws, the injury would be regarded as due to the negligence of a fellow servant, barring recovery. The issue was whether Walsh could recover for the tort under Massachusetts law, even though it occurred in Connecticut. The court ruled that Massachusetts would enforce a right of action from another state as long as the views of the laws were similar and did not differ fundamentally. As different states may have slight variations in their common law, this alone should not prevent enforcement of obligations that arose under the governing law of the occurrence.

Uploaded by

kdescallar
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
68 views8 pages

Walsh v. R. Co: 36 N.E. 584, Am. St. Rep. 514

Walsh, an employee of a railroad company in Connecticut, was injured by a broken draw-bar. He brought a tort action against the railroad company in Massachusetts. The Massachusetts trial court found that under its laws, the injury would be regarded as due to the negligence of a fellow servant, barring recovery. The issue was whether Walsh could recover for the tort under Massachusetts law, even though it occurred in Connecticut. The court ruled that Massachusetts would enforce a right of action from another state as long as the views of the laws were similar and did not differ fundamentally. As different states may have slight variations in their common law, this alone should not prevent enforcement of obligations that arose under the governing law of the occurrence.

Uploaded by

kdescallar
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 8

Walsh

 v.  R.  Co  


36  N.E.  584,  Am.  St.  Rep.  514  
FACTS  
•  1.  Walsh  was  an  employee  of  defendant  railroad  
company  in  the  State  of  ConnecDcut.    Walsh  was  
injured   by   a   broken   draw-­‐bar   and   brought   an  
acDon   for   tort   against   defendant   railroad  
company   in   the   State   of   Massachussets.     It   was  
not   stated   why   he   chose   to   bring   the   acDon   in  
that  forum.  
•  2.  The  Trial  Court  of  Massachussets  that  under  its  
laws,   the   injury   was   regarded   as   due   to   the  
negligence   of   a   fellow   servant,   and   thus   barred  
the  plainDff  for  recovery.    
ISSUE  
Whether   or   not   Walsh   can   recover   for   the   tort  
which   happened   in   ConnecDcut   under   the   laws  
of  Massachussets?  
COURT  RULING  
A   MassachuseUs   court   will   enforce   a   right   of  
acDon   for   personal   injury   arising   under   the  
common   law   of   another   state,   as   there  
understood   and   administered,   where   there   is  
only   slight   variance   of   view   in   MassachuseUs,  
not   amounDng   to   a   fundamental   difference   of  
policy,  
DOCTRINE  
As   between   the   States   of   this   Union,   when   a  
transitory  cause  of  acDon  vested  in  one  of  them  
under   the   common   law,   the   mere   existence   of   a  
slight  variance  of  view  in  the  forum  resorted  to,  
not   amounDng   to   a   fundamental   difference   of  
policy,   should   not   prevent   an   enforcement   of  
the   obligaDon   admiUed   to   have   arisen   by   the  
law  which  governed  the  conduct  of  the  parDes.    

You might also like