Madalinski v. Hill
Michigan Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtBushnell, J.
Alleging defendant’s negligence in the operation of his automobile and his violation of the ordinances of the city of Detroit and the State motor vehicle act (1 Comp. Laws 1929, § 4693 et seq.), plaintiff administratrix sought damages, under the survival act (3 Comp. Laws 1929, § 14040), for the death of her husband.
The jury found for defendant. Plaintiff appeals, alleging errors by the court as follows:
1. Permitting a series of questions and answers as to the sobriety of plaintiff’s intestate and ruling that the question of his sobriety was admissible.
2. Refusing to permit identification of…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Lamb v. LippincottMichigan Supreme Court · 1898
- Cronkhite v. DickersonMichigan Supreme Court · 1883
- Zoski v. GainesMichigan Supreme Court · 1935
- Kingston v. Fort Wayne & Elmwood Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1898
3Cited by12 opinions
- Grubb v. Illinois Terminal Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1937
- Davenport v. District of ColumbiaDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1948
- In Re Parkside Housing ProjectMichigan Supreme Court · 1939
- Dehring v. Northern Mich. Exploration Co., Inc.Michigan Court of Appeals · 1981
- Grzelka v. Chevrolet Motor Car Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1938
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.