Legal Opinion

Flint & Pere Marquette Railway Co. v. Lull

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided January 13, 1874PublishedCited by 37 opinions

Error to Saginaw Circuit.

1Opinion of the CourtCooley, J.

Lull sued the railway company to recover the value- of a cow killed by one of its trains passing through the. village of Bridgeport. The right of recovery is based upon an amendment to section thirty-six of the general railroad act approved March 29, 1872 (Laws 1872, page 72), which reads as follows:

“Sec. 36. Every railroad company formed under this act, and every person or corporation owning or occupying any such railway, shall erect and maintain fences on the sides of their respective roads, of the height and strength of a division fence required by law, with suitable openings and gates or…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railroad v. MillerMichigan Supreme Court · 1872
  2. Corwin v. . the New-York and Erie Railroad Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1855
  3. Indianapolis & Cincinnati Railroad v. KinneyIndiana Supreme Court · 1857
  4. Lafayette & Indianapolis Railroad v. ShrinerIndiana Supreme Court · 1855
  5. Davis v. Burlington & Missouri River R. R.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1869

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

3Cited by37 opinions

  1. I. & G. N. R. R. Co. v. CockeTexas Supreme Court · 1885
  2. Caspar v. LewinSupreme Court of Kansas · 1910
  3. Syneszewski v. SchmidtMichigan Supreme Court · 1908
  4. Rex Pierce, Jr., a Minor by His Next Friend, Janet Pierce v. New York Central Railroad CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1969
  5. Welty v. Indianapolis & Vincennes RailroadIndiana Supreme Court · 1886

32 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