Legal Opinion

Arfman v. Tamarack Mining Co.

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided July 23, 1915No. Docket No. 53Published

Error to Houghton; Cooper, J., presiding. Case by Kate Arfman, as administratrix of the estate of Reinhold Arfman, deceased, for the unlawful killing of plaintiff’s intestate. Judgment for defendant. Plaintiff brings error.

1Opinion of the CourtStone, J.

This is the companion case to that of John Lahti against the same defendant, decided on June 7, 1915, by this court, and reported in 186 Mich. 18 (152 N. W. 907). Roth cases are founded upon the same accident and occurrence. The accident occurred on the morning of March 19,1910, on the fifteenth level of defendant’s No. 3 north, Tamarack shaft. The plaintiff’s intestate, Reinhold Arfman, deceased, was fatally injured, surviving only a few hours, and Lahti received injuries from which he recovered. In this record Lahti appeared as a witness under the name of John Laho. In the instant case, the…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Lahti v. Tamarack Mining Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1915

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

Powered by the Exa API