Legal Opinion

Schneider v. Pomerville

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided February 28, 1957No. Docket 22, Calendar 46,980PublishedCited by 78 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBlack, J.

(after stating the facts). First: The case before us is a close one since it appears with clearly preponderating force that defendant Pomer-ville was the first of the 2 approaching drivers to partially encroach upon the left side of the pavement. The real question — one of fact manifestly— is thus addressed to causation, refined to this: Did the defendant driver return to his own side of the pavement in ample time, considering relative distances and speeds, to eliminate the sudden emergency doctrine plaintiff invokes?

The assignment of error before us requires thought upon the same questions…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Railroad Co. v. StoutSupreme Court of the United States · 1874
  2. Leonard v. HeyMichigan Supreme Court · 1934
  3. Jones v. Eastern Michigan MotorbusesMichigan Supreme Court · 1939
  4. Hayes Construction Co. v. SilverthornMichigan Supreme Court · 1955
  5. Brackins v. Olympia, Inc.Michigan Supreme Court · 1946

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

3Cited by78 opinions

  1. Hi-Way Motor Co. v. International Harvester Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1976
  2. Tuttle v. Department of State HighwaysMichigan Supreme Court · 1976
  3. Napier v. JacobsMichigan Supreme Court · 1987
  4. Precopio v. City of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 1982
  5. McCarty C. Mercury Metalcraft Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1964

73 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