Legal Opinion

Sadowski v. Michigan Car Co.

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided December 24, 1890PublishedCited by 20 opinions

Error to Wayne. (Hosmei’, J.) Negligence case. Defendant brings error. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtCahill, J.

This is an action for damages for personal injuries received by the plaintiff July 2, 1887, while in the employment qf the defendant. The verdict was for the plaintiff, and defendant brings error.

I take the following statement of facts substantially from appellant’s brief:

Defendant was engaged in the manufacture of cars in the city of Detroit, and employed about 2,200 men. One part of its premises was known as the “lumber-yard.” James McGregor was the general superintendent. His son, James C. McGregor, was foreman of the lumberyard. Plaintiff had worked for the defendant about five years as a…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Detroit & Milwaukee Railroad v. Van SteinburgMichigan Supreme Court · 1868
  2. Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railroad v. MillerMichigan Supreme Court · 1872
  3. Ford v. Fitchburg RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1872
  4. VanDusen v. LetellierMichigan Supreme Court · 1889
  5. Morton v. Detroit, Bay City & Alpena RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1890

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Beach v. City of St. JosephMichigan Supreme Court · 1916
  2. Cadden v. American Steel Barge Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1894
  3. Balhoff v. Michigan Central RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1895
  4. Shannon v. Consolidated Tiger & Poorman Mining Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1901
  5. Hammarberg v. St. Paul & Tacoma Lumber Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1898

15 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