Legal Opinion

Tishhouse v. Schoenberg

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided March 20, 1926No. Docket No. 169PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFellows, J.

Plaintiff brought this action to recover for damages occasioned him by reason of the alleged negligence of the defendant, and recovered a substantial judgment. There are no assignments of error on the admission or rejection of testimony. No motion was made for a directed verdict nor was any such request preferred. The case was tried by both parties as a jury case with disputed questions of fact, and defendant preferred two requests on that theory, both of which were given in substance. After verdict defendant filed a motion for a new trial, for the first time claiming that negligence of…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Kinney v. FolkertsMichigan Supreme Court · 1891
  2. Groat v. Detroit United RailwayMichigan Supreme Court · 1908
  3. Mahiat v. CoddeMichigan Supreme Court · 1895
  4. McCormick v. HawkinsMichigan Supreme Court · 1912
  5. Ward v. CareyMichigan Supreme Court · 1918

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

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Napier v. JacobsMichigan Supreme Court · 1987
  2. Universal Products Co. v. EmersonSupreme Court of Delaware · 1935
  3. Mesh v. CitrinMichigan Supreme Court · 1941
  4. City of Detroit v. F. L. Lowrie Lumber & Finish Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1933
  5. In Re Bathwick's EstateMichigan Supreme Court · 1927

10 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