Legal Opinion

Noble v. St. Joseph & Benton Harbor Street Railway Co.

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided December 22, 1893PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Error to Berrien. (O’Hara, J.) Negligence case. Defendant brings error. Affirmed. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtMontgomery, J.

The plaintiff recovered a judgment for personal injuries received while a passenger on defendant’s horse car. The duty of the company, a failure to observe which is claimed to have resulted in the injury, is alleged as follows:

“ It thereupon became and was the duty of said defendant to safely carry, the said plaintiff from said St. Joseph to said Benton Harbor, and to supply for said car upon which said plaintiff took passage as aforesaid safe and gentle horses, and such horses as would not become frightened or fractious at or because of any heap of material, clay, or rubbish that might be…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Laughlin v. Street Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1886
  2. Upham v. Detroit City Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1891
  3. Cowan v. Muskegon Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1891
  4. Woodbury v. City of OwossoMichigan Supreme Court · 1887

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Baran v. Reading Iron Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1902
  2. Murphy v. Manistee Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1917
  3. Robbins v. Magoon & Kimball Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1915
  4. Benage v. Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1895

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

Powered by the Exa API