Bond v. Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Co.
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Washtenaw; Kinne, J. Case by Hattie M. Bond against the Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Company for personal injuries. Verdict and judgment passed for plaintiff, and, defendant’s motion for a new trial having been denied, it brings error.
1Opinion of the CourtGrant, J.
This case is before us for the second time.
See 117 Mich. 652 (76 N. W. 102), for a sufficient statement of the case. It has been tried again, resulting in another verdict for the plaintiff. We held that, under the evidence appearing upon that trial, the court should have directed a verdict for the defendant. The situation and the facts elicited are substantially the same now as then. Plaintiff is the only witness who has made any substantial change in her testimony.
*578Was the defendant negligent? The negligence relied on is the failure to give the crossing signals. We said upon the former trial…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Britton v. Michigan Central RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1899
- Baldwin v. Grand Trunk Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1901
- Brinker v. Michigan Central RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1899
- County of Montmorency v. PutnamMichigan Supreme Court · 1901
- Bond v. Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1898
3Cited by4 opinions
- Lambert v. Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1920
- Tuttle v. Briscoe Manufacturing Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1916
- Fillingham v. Detroit, Grand Haven & Milwaukee Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1919
- Tietz v. Grand Trunk Railway Co. of CanadaMichigan Supreme Court · 1911