Legal Opinion

Apsey v. Detroit, Lansing & Northern Railroad

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided April 16, 1895PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Error to Ingham. (Person, J.) Negligence case. Plaintiff brings error. The facts are stated in the opinion, and in 83 Mich. 432.

1Opinion of the CourtGrant, J.

It was held in the former opinion that the plaintiff could not recover on account of the contributory negligence of James Apsey, the father of the deceased, who was driving at the time of the accident. The evidence of such negligence in the present record is the same as that in the other, nor does the record differ in any particular from the former. That opinion was written by Chief Justice Champlin, and concurred in by the entire Court. Upon the second trial in the circuit, the court, in accordance with the former opinion, directed a verdict for the defendant. That decision settled the law…

2Cited by4 opinions

  1. American Insurance v. MartinekMichigan Supreme Court · 1921
  2. Terrill v. Michigan United Traction Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1921
  3. Ruttle v. What Cheer Coal Mining Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1910
  4. Morley v. University of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 1934

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API