Nephew v. Michigan Central Railroad
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Wayne; Hosmer, J. Assumpsit by Joseph Nephew against the Michigan Central Eailroad Company for the breach of an alleged contract of employment. From a judgment for defendant on verdict directed by the court, plaintiff brings error. In 1887, and for some two years prior thereto, plaintiff had been employed as a brakeman on a passenger express train of the defendant company. On May 5,1887, his hand was injured while coupling the engine to the baggage car.
Read the full summary
Error to Wayne; Hosmer, J. Assumpsit by Joseph Nephew against the Michigan Central Eailroad Company for the breach of an alleged contract of employment. From a judgment for defendant on verdict directed by the court, plaintiff brings error. In 1887, and for some two years prior thereto, plaintiff had been employed as a brakeman on a passenger express train of the defendant company. On May 5,1887, his hand was injured while coupling the engine to the baggage car. He was detained from work only two or three days, and continued in his employment as a brakeman of that train until he was taken off…
1Opinion of the CourtGrant, J.
(after stating the facts). Authority to settle a lawsuit does not imply authority on the part of the attorney to make contracts for future employment. *602Mr. Russel, the attorney for the company, had nothing whatever to do with operating the road, or the employment or discharge of employés. His sole duty was connected with legal matters. Corporations usually have such a general attorney, to whom they refer their legal matters, and ask for advice. His authority is limited to what is customary or necessary in such transactions. Mechem, Ag. §§ 285, 286; Upton v. Suffolk County Mills, 11 Cush. 586…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Carney v. New York Life InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1900
- Brighton v. Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1894
- Camacho v. Hamilton Bank Note & Engraving Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1896
- Maxson v. Michigan Central RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1898
3Cited by11 opinions
- Stephens v. John L. Roper Lumber Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1912
- Cox v. Baltimore & Ohio Southwestern RailroadIndiana Supreme Court · 1913
- Laird v. Michigan Lubricator Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1908
- Wierman v. Bay City-Michigan Sugar Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1905
- Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis, Ry. Co. v. GreenOhio Supreme Court · 1933
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.