Legal Opinion · Dissent

Gilbert v. Flint & Pere Marquette Railway Co.

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided October 17, 1883Published

Error to Genesee. (Newton, J.) Case. Defendant brings error. "Where a train was left on the highway, with scarcely room for a vehicle to pass, and a team became frightened thereby, the railway company was held liable: Ogle v. Phila., Wil. <& Balt. JR. JR. 3 Houst. 267; Great Western JR. JR. Go. v. JDeoatwr 33 Ill. 381.

1DissentSherwood, J.

(dissenting) In this case, under the facts and circumstances stated in the record, I think the defendant was guilty of actionable negligence in allowing its freight car to remain standing upon the public highway in the manner it is shown to have done at the time the injury occurred to the plaintiff; and I further think that an empty box car, or any other kind of railroad car, allowed to stand in the highway as this was permitted to, is naturally calculated to frighten horses of ordinary gentleness, not accustomed to go or be used about such cars.

The defendant did not demur to the plaintiff’s…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Rowland v. Superintendents of the PoorMichigan Supreme Court · 1883
  2. Stoflet v. MarkerMichigan Supreme Court · 1876
  3. Aldrich v. ChubbMichigan Supreme Court · 1877
  4. Brown v. McHughMichigan Supreme Court · 1876

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

Powered by the Exa API