Legal Opinion

Longfellow v. City of Detroit

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided September 8, 1942No. Docket Nos. 42, 43, Calendar Nos. 41,697, 41,698PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtChandler, C. J.

Plaintiff, Wilhelmina Longfellow, instituted her action against the defendant to recover damages for injuries received while riding on one of defendant’s buses on Grand River avenue in the city of Detroit. Her action was consolidated with one brought by plaintiff, Albert Longfellow, her husband, to recover for loss of services and medical expenses, and both cases are here for review.

The jury failed to agree, and after being discharged, the trial court entered judgments for defendant under the authority of the provisions of 3 Comp. Laws 1929, § 14535 (Stat. Ann. § 27.1471), and on appeal, we…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Ottinger v. Detroit United RailwayMichigan Supreme Court · 1911
  2. Poundstone v. Niles CreameryMichigan Supreme Court · 1940
  3. Adelsperger v. City of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 1929
  4. Bogart v. City of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 1930
  5. Dedo v. SkinnerMichigan Supreme Court · 1941

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Mitcham v. City of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 1959
  2. Frederick v. City of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 1963
  3. Routhier v. City of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 1953
  4. Staunton v. City of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 1951
  5. Sherman v. Flint Trolley Coach, Inc.Michigan Supreme Court · 1943

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

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

Powered by the Exa API