Poole v. Consolidated Street Railway Co.
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to superior court of Grand Rapids. (Burlingame, J.) Argued January 30 and 31, 1894. Decided May 22, 1894. Negligence' case. Defendant brings error. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtMontgomery, J.
The defendant operates an. electric street railroad in Grand Rapids, with a line extending to Reed’s Lake, which is a summer resort a short distance east of the city. The company maintains pleasure grounds at this place, including a pavilion and conveniences for visitors. During „the summer, the travel over this route is very large. Eor the convenient transaction of its business, the company’s double track is extended and formed into a' ■loop at the Reed’s Lake terminus, so that cars may run continuously, without reversing or switching, around this loop, and back to the city. Within this loop…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- McDonald v. Chicago & N. W. R. R.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1868
- Ryan v. Manhattan Railway Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1890
- Dikeman v. ArnoldMichigan Supreme Court · 1888
3Cited by14 opinions
- Fillingham v. St. Louis Transit Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1903
- Gapske v. HatchMichigan Supreme Court · 1957
- Schattilly v. YonkerMichigan Supreme Court · 1957
- Spurrier Lumber Co. v. DodsonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1911
- Caley v. Kansas City, Missouri & Kansas City Public Service Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1932
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.