Legal Opinion

Meola v. Quincy Mining Co.

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided March 20, 1913No. Docket No. 74PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Error to Houghton; Streeter, J. Case by Leonard Meóla, administrator of the estate of Antonio Tabaracci, deceased, against the Quincy Mining Company for the unlawful killing of plaintiff’s intestate. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error. Plaintiff is administrator of the estate of one Antonio Tabaracci, who on December 8, 1908, was instantly killed in defendant’s mine.

Read the full summary

Error to Houghton; Streeter, J. Case by Leonard Meóla, administrator of the estate of Antonio Tabaracci, deceased, against the Quincy Mining Company for the unlawful killing of plaintiff’s intestate. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error. Plaintiff is administrator of the estate of one Antonio Tabaracci, who on December 8, 1908, was instantly killed in defendant’s mine. Decedent lost his life through coming in contact with a loosened trolley wire carrying a lethal current. Decedent had been in the employ of defendant for some years as a trammer. It is the duty of the trammer to load…

1Opinion of the CourtBrooke, J.

(after stating the facts). Under the testimony of the witness Tiva, to the effect that the trolley wire had become loosened from the clamp 24 hours previous to the accident, that the defect was reported to the trammer boss, and that it was fixed by Tiva at the direction of the trammer boss, we are of opinion that the ques-*309lion of defendant’s negligence was for the determination of the jury.

Upon the question of decedent’s negligence, the following facts áre undisputed: When the trolley wire becomes defective, it is the duty of the trammers to push the cars by hand past the defective place…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co. v. BayfieldMichigan Supreme Court · 1877
  2. Cooper v. Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1887
  3. Balch v. Grand Rapids & Indiana RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1887
  4. Ingersoll v. Detroit & Mackinac Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1910
  5. Clark v. GoldieMichigan Supreme Court · 1906

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Capital Airlines, Inc. v. BargerCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1960
  2. Capital Airlines, Inc. v. BargerCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1960

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API