Legal Opinion

Grunst v. Chicago & West Michigan Railway Co.

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided May 19, 1896PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Error to Wayne; Frazer, J. Case by August Grunst against tbe Chicago & West Michigan Railway Company for personal injuries. From a judgment for defendant on verdict directed by the court, plaintiff brings error.

1Opinion of the CourtMontgomery, J.

Plaintiff was a railroad man of several years’ experience, and for eight months prior to February 26, 1891, was employed by the Detroit, Grand Haven & Milwaukee Railway Company as yardmaster at Grand Haven. His duties compelled him to attend to the switching of freight cars, to bring them to the freight house, to load boats, to receive freight cars from the defendant company to his own, and to deliver cars from his own company to the defendant company. For the performance of these duties he had in his charge and under his direction a switching engine and crew. Evidence on *343the part of the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Hargreaves v. DeaconMichigan Supreme Court · 1872
  2. Pittsburgh, Fort Wayne & Chicago Railway Co. v. BinghamOhio Supreme Court · 1876
  3. Severy v. NickersonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1876
  4. Planz v. Boston & Albany RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1892
  5. Kelly v. Michigan Central RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1887

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. St. Louis Southwestern Railway Co. v. SpiveyTexas Supreme Court · 1903
  2. O'Leary v. Michigan State Telephone Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1906

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

Powered by the Exa API