Freeman v. Duluth, South Shore & Atlantic Railway Co.
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Marquette. (Grant, J.) Case. Defendant brings error. Tbe facts are stated in tbe opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtMorse, J.
The plaintiffs sue for the value of a horse and carriage destroyed by collision with an engine on defendant’s track at the Genesee-street crossing in the city of Marquette.
The plaintiffs keep a livery-stable in said city, and on the day of the accident hired the horse and carriage to one John Grant, who was driving the same at the time of the collision. During the course of the trial, by mutual consent of the parties, the place of the accident was visited. The following appears in the record in reference to such visit:
“The court thereupon took a recess for one hour, and the court, counsel,…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Guggenheim v. Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1887
- Battishill v. HumphreysMichigan Supreme Court · 1888
- Battishill v. HumphreysMichigan Supreme Court · 1887
3Cited by37 opinions
- Gibbard v. CursanMichigan Supreme Court · 1923
- Baker v. Kansas City, Fort Scott & Memphis RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1894
- Kinyon v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1902
- White v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1899
- Emery v. Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1964
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.