Legal Opinion

Frye v. Gilomen

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided September 15, 1960No. Docket No. 33, Calendar No. 48,414PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtKavanagh, J.

Plaintiff, a pedestrian, instituted a neglig’ence action against defendants Otto Gilomen and Joseph Santo Cardella, the owner and the driver, respectively, of a taxicab. It was the claim of plaintiff that about 2:30 in the morning of June 20, 1957, while in the act of crossing from the easterly to the westerly side of Cass avenue in the city of Detroit, he was struck by a taxicab which was being negligently driven by defendant Cardella in a southerly direction on Cass avenue. Plaintiff alleged he was crossing the street with the green light, he was not guilty of any negligence, and the…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. McGuire v. RabautMichigan Supreme Court · 1958
  2. Churukian v. LaGestMichigan Supreme Court · 1959
  3. Williams v. BaileyMichigan Supreme Court · 1915
  4. Madill v. CurrieMichigan Supreme Court · 1912
  5. Szost v. DykmanMichigan Supreme Court · 1930

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Zeni v. AndersonMichigan Court of Appeals · 1974
  2. Smith v. FallsMichigan Court of Appeals · 1972
  3. Zeni v. AndersonMichigan Court of Appeals · 1974

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

Powered by the Exa API