Legal Opinion

Asplund v. Calumet & Hecla Mining Co.

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided November 3, 1913No. Docket No. 68PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Error to Houghton; Cooper* J., presiding. Case by Victor Asplund against the Calumet & Hecla Mining Company for personal injuries. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error.

1Opinion of the CourtMoore, J.

The plaintiff is a miner, and while at work in the Osceola lode of the defendant’s mine he was injured by the falling of a considerable mass of rock. His thigh was broken, and he received other injuries. After plaintiff had put in all his evidence, defendant putting in no evidence, a directed verdict was requested on *the part of the defendant. This request was denied. The case was submitted to a jury, which returned a substantial verdict in favor of the plaintiff. The case is brought here by writ of error.

*531The errors assigned make it necessary to quote freely from the charge of the court,…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Stephens v. Hannibal & St. Joseph RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1888
  2. Toomey v. Eureka Iron & Steer WorksMichigan Supreme Court · 1891
  3. Roux v. Blodgett & Davis Lumber Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1891
  4. Bailey v. CostelloWisconsin Supreme Court · 1896
  5. Lyttle v. Chicago & West Michigan Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1890

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Barkow v. Donovan Wire & Iron Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1916
  2. Baucino v. FitzpatrickMichigan Supreme Court · 1915
  3. Stone v. BennettMichigan Supreme Court · 1916

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

Powered by the Exa API