Legal Opinion

Merrifield v. Village of Paw Paw

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided March 2, 1936No. Docket No. 67, Calendar No. 38,760PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtButzel, J.

The removal of a pole, and subsequent failure to completely fill up the hole it was planted in, left an opening extending about one foot into the sidewalk and variously estimated to be from 1% to 5 inches deep, in the walk on a main street in the village of Paw Paw, Michigan. One bright day, October 5, 1934, at about 3 p. m., plaintiff stepped into this hole, stumbled, fell and suffered injuries. On November 27, 1934, he presented to the village of Paw Paw a claim for damages amounting to $2,675. He signed both the claim and the “affidavit” to the claim. The jurat, which appeared at the…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Ponsrok v. City of YonkersNew York Court of Appeals · 1930
  2. People ex rel. Esper v. BurnsMichigan Supreme Court · 1910
  3. People ex rel. Dickinson v. SimondsonMichigan Supreme Court · 1872
  4. Kelley v. City of FlintMichigan Supreme Court · 1930
  5. Peterson v. FowlerMichigan Supreme Court · 1889

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Lawrence Russell v. City of DetroitMichigan Court of Appeals · 2017
  2. Knapp v. City of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 1940
  3. Pappas v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 1979
  4. Aune v. City of MandanNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1969
  5. In re Central Stamping & Mfg. Co.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 1948

4 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