Legal Opinion
Sterner v. Michigan Central Railroad
Michigan Supreme Court
Decided June 18, 1925No. Docket No. 47PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtFellows, J.
(after stating the facts). The testimony, and we have quoted all of it on the subject, clearly establishes that plaintiff at the time he received the injury was employed repairing locomotives used in interstate commerce. If he was within the purview of the Federal act, his action was not season ably brought; Bement v. Railway Co., 194 Mich. 64 (L. R. A. 1917E, 322), where the appropriate provision of the act is quoted. If the Federal act applies, it is exclusive as the authorities we shall presently cite demonstrate. Numerous cases involving the Federal act have been before this court. We…
2Cases cited38 opinions
- Second Employers'liability CasesSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
- Pedersen v. Delaware, Lackawanna & Western RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
- Shanks v. Delaware, Lackawanna & Western RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
- North Carolina Railroad v. ZacharySupreme Court of the United States · 1914
- New York Central Railroad Company v. WinfieldSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Milburn v. Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1932
- Bartosik v. Chicago River & Indiana RailroadAppellate Court of Illinois · 1932