Secrist v. City of Detroit
Michigan Supreme Court
1DissentButzel, J.
In addition to the facts set forth in Justice Bushnell’s opinion, the testimony of the motorman of the northbound streetcar shows that when he first saw plaintiff bring his automobile across the northbound tracks he believed that plaintiff would cross over them to the east side of the street. There was nothing to indicate to him that plaintiff would stand still on the tracks of the oncoming streetcar. When prolonged motionlessness on the tracks at length brought home to the motorman plaintiff’s intention not to move off the tracks, he made every conceivable effort to stop the streetcar but…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- O'Brien v. McGlinchySupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1878
- Krouse v. Southern Michigan Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1921
- Boerema v. CookMichigan Supreme Court · 1931
- Sanderson v. BarkmanMichigan Supreme Court · 1933
- Williams v. EdmundsMichigan Supreme Court · 1889
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.