Huber v. Twin City General Electric Co.
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Gogebic; Cooper, J. Case by Bartholomew Huber against the Twin City General Electric Company for personal injuries. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error. Plaintiff, a man 40 years of age, had for 20 years been following the occupation of an electric lineman. He was experienced in the handling of live wires. In his work he customarily repaired electric light, telephone, and telegraph wires. These wires sometimes carried a high voltage.
Read the full summary
Error to Gogebic; Cooper, J. Case by Bartholomew Huber against the Twin City General Electric Company for personal injuries. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error. Plaintiff, a man 40 years of age, had for 20 years been following the occupation of an electric lineman. He was experienced in the handling of live wires. In his work he customarily repaired electric light, telephone, and telegraph wires. These wires sometimes carried a high voltage. He had handled those carrying as high as 4,000 volts. In the spring of 1909 the defendant was engaged in changing the character of its…
1Opinion of the CourtBrooke, J.
(after stating the facts). Defendant contends that the judgment should' be reversed for several reasons:(1) Because the court erred in admitting evidence of the fact that the guy wire had become charged upon two former occasions; it appearing that the defendant upon being notified had at once caused repairs to be made.(2) Because the court erred in admitting testimony that when repairs were made before the accident they were not made properly.(3) Because the court erred in admitting testimony that the lines at the place of the accident were not originally properly constructed.(4) Because the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Anderson v. Inland Telephone & Telegraph Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1898
- Chisholm v. New England Telephone & Telegraph Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1900
- Lynch v. Saginaw Valley Traction Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1908
- Britton v. Central Union Telephone Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1904
- De Kallands v. Washtenaw Home Telephone Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1908
3Cited by16 opinions
- Clumfoot v. St. Clair Tunnel Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1922
- Wilhelm v. Detroit Edison Co.Michigan Court of Appeals · 1974
- Laney v. Consumers Power Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1983
- Paperno v. Michigan Railway Engineering Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1918
- Swaczyk v. Detroit Edison Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1919
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.