Heppenstall Steel Co. v. Wabash Railway Co.
Michigan Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtFellows, J.
(after stating the facts). This court has uniformly held that cases may be made by circumstantial evidence. This is not the adoption of the rule res ipsa loquitur, a rule not favored by this court. It has always been the rule of this jurisdiction that the jury should be permitted to draw legitimate inferences from the established facts. So to do is an entirely different thing than to permit the jury to speculate or guess what the facts are. In the instant .case the plaintiff’s proofs presented the following established facts for the consideration of the jury: (a.) That a railway track…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Gibbard v. CursanMichigan Supreme Court · 1923
3Cited by21 opinions
- Grimes v. KingMichigan Supreme Court · 1945
- Daigneau v. YoungMichigan Supreme Court · 1957
- In Re Estate of MillerMichigan Supreme Court · 1942
- Hazen v. RockefellerMichigan Supreme Court · 1942
- Poundstone v. Niles CreameryMichigan Supreme Court · 1940
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.