Strand v. Chicago & West Michigan Railway Co.
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Kent. (Montgomery, J.) Case. Defendant brings error. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtMorse, J.
There is no material difference in the evidence before us now and that presented when the case was. first here. See 64 Mich. 216.
There was, therefore, sufficient testimony on the question of negligence, both as regards the plaintiff and defendant, to submit the case to the jury.
No errors are assigned in relation to the admission or rejection of testimony. The whole argument is aimed at the charge of the court.
There are 31 assignments of error. Several of them are disposed of already, as they are directed against the submission of the case to the jury. Many of the requests refused were given…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Dunbar v. McGillMichigan Supreme Court · 1887
- Strand v. Chicago & West Michigan Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1887
3Cited by22 opinions
- Rollestone v. Cassirer & Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1907
- Jones v. Eastern Michigan MotorbusesMichigan Supreme Court · 1939
- United States v. Lee HuenDistrict Court, N.D. New York · 1902
- Gardiner v. CourtrightMichigan Supreme Court · 1911
- Thornton v. City of FlintMichigan Court of Appeals · 1972
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.