Legal Opinion

Van Auken v. Chicago & West Michigan Railway Co.

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided June 30, 1893PublishedCited by 16 opinions

Error to Van Burén. (Buck, J.) Negligence case. Defendant brings error. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtMontgomery, J.

The question of most importance involved in this case is that of the contributory negligence of the driver' of plaintiff’s vehicle when they approached the crossing where the accident occurred. The scene of the accident is indicated by the diagram appended to the opinion of Mr. Justice Grant. The highway and the railroad do not meet at right angles, so that in traveling from the east towards the railway track the view would not be directly in the face of an approaching train. The night when the injury occurred was very dark. The evidence shows that when approaching the crossing the horses…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railroad v. MillerMichigan Supreme Court · 1872
  2. Louisville, New Albany & Chicago Railway Co. v. FrawleyIndiana Supreme Court · 1886
  3. Carroll v. . Staten Island R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1874
  4. Guggenheim v. Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1887
  5. Mynning v. Detroit, Lansing & Northern RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1887

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Manning v. Bishop of MarquetteMichigan Supreme Court · 1956
  2. Richardson v. Detroit & Mackinac Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1913
  3. Solarz v. Manhattan Railway Co.The Superior Court of the City of New York and Buffalo · 1894
  4. Stewart v. Michigan Central RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1898
  5. Gross v. MillerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1894

11 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