Legal Opinion

Hurst v. Detroit City Railway

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided February 6, 1891PublishedCited by 73 opinions

Error to Wayne. (Brevoort, J.) Negligence case. Plaintiff brings error. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtLong, J.

This cause was tried before a jury in the Wayne circuit court, where the defendant had verdict in its favor under direction of the court. Judgment' being entered upon the verdict, plaintiff brings the case to this Court by writ of error.

The declaration alleges, substantially, that the .defendant is a corporation organized and existing under the *541laws of this State; that on the - day of August, 1889, it was engaged in the carrying of passengers, for hire, in cars drawn by horses, through and along Brush street, in the city of Detroit; that Brush street was and is densely populated, whereby it…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Tomlinson v. Town of DerbySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1876
  2. Pennsylvania Co. v. LillyIndiana Supreme Court · 1881
  3. Rajnowski v. Detroit, Bay City & Alpena RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1889
  4. Van Brunt v. Cincinnati, Jackson & Mackinaw RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1889
  5. Clinton v. LaningMichigan Supreme Court · 1886

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by73 opinions

  1. City of Columbus v. AnglinSupreme Court of Georgia · 1904
  2. Brown v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1899
  3. Napier v. StrongCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1917
  4. St. Louis S. F. R. Co. v. Goode, Adm'x.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1914
  5. Love v. Detroit, Jackson & Chicago RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1912

68 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API