Legal Opinion

Crosby v. Pere Marquette Railroad

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided June 27, 1902No. Docket No. 50PublishedCited by 9 opinions

Error to Muskegon; Russell, J. Debt by Edward Q-. Crosby and Robert R. Rice, copartners as the Crosby Transportation Company, against the Pere Marquette Railroad Company, to recover a penalty. Prom a judgment for defendant on verdict directed by the court, plaintiffs bring error.

1Opinion of the CourtMontgomery, J.

This is an action to recover the penalty prescribed by 2 Comp. Laws, § 6235, which reads as follows:

“ Every such corporation shall furnish sufficient accommodation for the transportation of all such passengers and property as shall, within a reasonable time previous thereto, offer or be offered for transportation at the place of starting, and the junctions of other railroads, and at siding and at stopping places established for discharging and receiving way passengers and freight, and shall take, transport, and discharge such passengers and property at, from, and to such places on the due…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Hadley v. Western Union Telegraph Co.Indiana Supreme Court · 1888
  2. St. Louis & Tennessee River Packet Co. v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1889
  3. Lafaye v. HarrisSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1858

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. People v. EllisMichigan Supreme Court · 1918
  2. Central Trust Co. v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1912
  3. Van Camp v. Michigan Central RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1904
  4. Young v. MooreMichigan Supreme Court · 1910
  5. Bergy Bros. v. Zeeland Feeder Pig, Inc.Michigan Supreme Court · 1982

4 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