Legal Opinion

Beagle v. Pere Marquette Railroad

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided January 4, 1915No. Docket No. 39PublishedCited by 6 opinions

Error to Genesee; Wisner, J. Case by May Beagle against the Pere Marquette Railroad Company for personal injuries. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error.

1Opinion of the CourtBrooke, C. J.

The following facts are undisputed on this record: The plaintiff, a woman in the prime of life and in the full possession of all her faculties, had lived immediately adjoining the crossing at which she was injured for .a period of a year and a half. She was familiar with the crossing and had occasion to use it with great frequency. She knew the number of tracks crossing the street at that point and their uses. The accident occurred in the middle of the day, and therefore in broad daylight. She knew that the freight engine, which had detached itself from its train and stood upon the crossing a…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Ellis v. Boston & Maine RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1897
  2. Brinker v. Michigan Central RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1899
  3. Spaven v. Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1902
  4. Boutell v. Michigan Central RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1903

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Amedeo v. Grand Rapids & Indiana Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1921
  2. Bishop v. New York Central RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1957
  3. Garland v. Michigan Central RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1917
  4. Alexander v. Grand Trunk Western RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1954
  5. Amedeo v. Grand Rapids & Indiana Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1921

1 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