Brady v. Pere Marquette Railway Co.
Michigan Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtWiest, J.
The circuit judge was right in directing the verdict for defendant.
If defendant was guilty of negligence, the husband of plaintiff, driver of the automobile, was clearly guilty of contributory negligence, and, under the doctrine of imputed negligence, she cannot recover.
The driver of the ear had open to him, and says he employed, a view of 700 feet down the track over which the train came, and that he saw no train, and yet, in driving his automobile a distance of about 15 feet, the train struck him. Where such a view is open, a collision between a train and an automobile moving across a…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Molda v. ClarkMichigan Supreme Court · 1926
- Molby v. Detroit United RailwayMichigan Supreme Court · 1922
- Rushford-Surine v. Grand Trunk Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1927
- Baader v. Detroit, Jackson & Chicago Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1924
- Kun v. Detroit, Jackson & Chicago Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1927
3Cited by16 opinions
- Richardson v. WilliamsMichigan Supreme Court · 1930
- Richman v. Detroit, Grand Haven & Milwaukee Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1931
- Jones v. Grand Trunk Western RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1942
- Filter v. MohrMichigan Supreme Court · 1936
- Heintzelman v. Pennsylvania RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1932
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.