Pringle v. City of Detroit
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to "Wayne; Donovan, J. Case by Annie Irene Pringle against the city of Detroit for personal injuries. There was judgment for defendant on a verdict directed by the. court, and plaintiff brings error.
1Opinion of the CourtOstrander, J.
Plaintiff was injured on the afternoon of February 10, 1904, in daylight, by slipping and falling on an icy sidewalk. She sued the defendant city and upon the trial of her case a verdict for defendant was directed by the court. No testimony was offered for defendant. Two principal contentions are urged here by plaintiff in error, which are:
“First. The trial judge having directed a verdict for the defendant because the plaintiff slipped on an icy walk, it necessarily must follow that he was in error in taking the case from the jury, unless the evidence clearly shows such to be the fact. If…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- McKellar v. City of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 1885
- Rolf v. City of GreenvilleMichigan Supreme Court · 1894
- Gavett v. City of JacksonMichigan Supreme Court · 1896
- Navarre v. City of Benton HarborMichigan Supreme Court · 1901
- Wesley v. City of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 1898
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Mayo v. Village of BaragaMichigan Supreme Court · 1913
- Jefferson v. City of Sault Ste. MarieMichigan Supreme Court · 1911
- Bard v. Weathervane of MichiganMichigan Court of Appeals · 1974
- Bard v. Weathervane of MichiganMichigan Court of Appeals · 1974