Brusseau v. Selmo
Michigan Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtSharpe, J.
I am not in accord with, the views of Mr. Justice McAllister. Additional facts show that plaintiff visited defendant’s place of business about a quarter after eleven on the evening in question and after making inquiries of the waitress, was directed to the door leading down to the toilet in the basement. As he opened the door to go down into the basement, the light from the store was sufficient to see the railing and the electric light switch which was on the same wall as the railing and two feet above. Before proceeding down stairs, plaintiff partly closed the door, leaving only sufficient…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Hudson v. Church of the Holy TrinityNew York Court of Appeals · 1929
- Benton v. WatsonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1919
- Kurre v. Graham Ship By Truck Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1932
- Blankertz v. MacK & Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1933
- McVeagh v. BassSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1933
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Huyink v. Hart Publications, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1942
- Ennis v. EnnisCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1979
- Grover v. SimonsMichigan Supreme Court · 1955
- Corfeld v. Douglas Houghton Hotel Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1949
- Kuhn v. KingMichigan Supreme Court · 1951
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.