Legal Opinion

Keyser v. Chicago & Grand Trunk Railway Co.

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided May 6, 1885PublishedCited by 27 opinions

Error to St. Clair. (Stevens, J.) Case. Plaintiff brings error.

1Opinion of the CourtSherwood, J.

The plaintiff in this case is an infant, and was about two years and six months old when he received the injuries complained of. On the 29th day of July, 1880, the defendant ran one of its passenger trains, composed of an engine and four cars, going east over its track through the township of Kimball, in the county of St. Clair. The plaintiff and his parents lived on section ten in Kimball, and about twenty rods south of the railway, on a private way, which was then generally used, and which crossed the railroad. The company’s track was unfenced, and the crossings not supplied with…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Marcott v. Marquette, Houghton & Ontonagon RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1881
  2. Marcott v. Marquette, Houghton & Ontonagon RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1882

3Cited by27 opinions

  1. Elbert v. City of SaginawMichigan Supreme Court · 1961
  2. Keyser v. Chicago & Grand Trunk Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1887
  3. Dickson v. Omaha & St. Louis RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1894
  4. Rosse v. St. Paul & Duluth Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1897
  5. Palmer v. Oregon Short Line R.Utah Supreme Court · 1908

22 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