Legal Opinion

Halladay v. Detroit United Railway

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided February 2, 1909No. Docket No. 61Published

Certiorari to Washtenaw; Kinne, J. Case by Mary A. Halladay against the Detroit United Railway and the Detroit, Jackson & Chicago Railway for personal injuries. There was an order denying a motion, to quash, and defendant Detroit United Railway brings certiorari.

1Opinion of the CourtMontgomery, J.

An action was instituted by the plaintiff in the circuit court for the county of Washtenaw against the two defendants, service was had upon a conductor in charge of one of the cars of the defendant the Detroit, Jackson & Chicago Railway, in the city of Ann Arbor, and thereafter service was had upon the defendant the Detroit United Railway, in the county of Wayne. A motion was made to quash the service of the declaration, and the present proceeding is certiorari to review the order denying that motion.

Two claims are made: First, that the service of the declaration upon the conductor in the…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Rosenthal v. RosenthalMichigan Supreme Court · 1908

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

Powered by the Exa API