Legal Opinion

Grand Rapids & Indiana R. R. v. Cameron

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided January 28, 1881PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Error to Kalamazoo. Case. Defendant brings error.

1Opinion of the CourtMarston, C. J.

In Flint & Pere Marquette Ry Co. v. Lull 28 Mich. 510, it was held that the liability of the company under the statute for injuries to cattle, by reason of the company’s fences not being put up and maintained, was not affected by the contributory negligence of the owner of the cattle. This disposes of several of the errors assigned in this court. It may be that the modification of the defendant’s sixth request, if standing alone, could not be sustained, but when we examine the' entire charge as given, we are of opinion that the error, if any, was cured. The charge on the whole was even more…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Flint & Pere Marquette Railway Co. v. LullMichigan Supreme Court · 1874

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Delaware v. SheltonSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1893
  2. Neversorry v. Duluth, South Shore & Atlantic Railway CoMichigan Supreme Court · 1897
  3. Geerds v. Ann Arbor RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1914

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

Powered by the Exa API