Legal Opinion

Hogan v. Detroit United Railway

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided November 2, 1908No. Docket No. 21PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Error to Wayne; Mandell, J. Trover by Walter Q-. Hogan against the Detroit United Railway. There was judgment for plaintiff, and defendant .brings error.

1Opinion of the CourtOstrander, J.

Former opinions of this court, in this case (140 Mich. 101; 148 Mich. 288) indicate the nature of the action, the issues, and the substance of the testimony produced. The facts made to appear upon the third trial are substantially those appearing upon each of the other trials. The jury rendered a verdict in favor of plaintiff. Judgment was entered on the verdict. A motion for a new trial was made, heard, and denied. Errors are assigned (1) upon rulings admitting certain testimony; (2) upon the charge given and upon refusals to charge the jury as requested by defendant; (3) upon the refusal to…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Hogan v. Detroit United RailwayMichigan Supreme Court · 1905
  2. Detroit Portland Cement Co. v. Genesee Circuit JudgeMichigan Supreme Court · 1907

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Detroit Trust Co. v. Detroit, Flint & Saginaw RailwayMichigan Supreme Court · 1909
  2. George J. Meyer Mfg. Co. v. SproulCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1941

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

Powered by the Exa API