Motyka v. Detroit, Grand Haven & Milwaukee Railway Co.

The facts are not in dispute. No presumption of care can be indulged, for plaintiffs called the sole eyewitness and his testi mony must be accepted as true. Defendant’s negligence must be conceded.

The statute required a flagman at the crossing when 'ordered by public authority (1 Comp. Laws 1929, § 1950, 2 Comp. Laws 1929, §§ 11051, 11170). One was ordered and was absent from his place of duty at the time of the accident. The statute, under penalty, also requires warning signals for the protection of crossings and all such safety measures are on a parity, but no one ever heard of recovery had…