Kiefer v. Fink
Michigan Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtClark, J.
The automobiles of the parties were in collision at an intersection of the highways. Plaintiff was injured. Defendants, when plaintiff rested his case, had directed verdict, and he brings error. The question is, Was plaintiff guilty of contributory negligence as a matter of law? Plaintiff was driving south on a trunk line highway. Defendants were driving east on a cross road, not a trunk line. The view at the intersection was ample and unobstructed. The cars were approaching the intersection at the same time. Plaintiff had in mind at the time that he had the right of way. We quote:
“When motor…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Geeck v. LuckenbillMichigan Supreme Court · 1921
- Pline v. ParsonsMichigan Supreme Court · 1925
- Amedeo v. Grand Rapids & Indiana Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1921
3Cited by8 opinions
- Diedrick v. HelmSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1944
- Finkler v. ZimmerMichigan Supreme Court · 1932
- Kerr v. HayesMichigan Supreme Court · 1930
- Block v. PetersonMichigan Supreme Court · 1938
- Henry v. SandersonMichigan Supreme Court · 1932
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.