Legal Opinion

Hine v. Bay Cities Consolidated Railway Co.

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided December 7, 1897PublishedCited by 8 opinions

Error to Bay; Maxwell, J. Case by Gustaves Hine against tbe Bay Cities Consolidated Railway Company to recover for moneys expended in effecting the cure of plaintiff’s daughter, alleged to have been injured through defendant’s negligence. From a judgment for defendant, plaintiff brings error.

1Opinion of the CourtMoore, J.

The following statement of facts is taken from the brief of counsel for plaintiff:

“Plaintiff resides in Bay City, at the southwest corner of Washington and Eighth streets. Washington street runs north and south, and Eighth street crosses it. Center street is north.of, and parallel to, Eighth street, and Seventh and Sixth intervene. Twelfth street is south of, and parallel to, Eighth, and Ninth, Tenth, and Eleventh streets intervene. On July 18, 1893, the defendant corporation had two parallel street-railway tracks on Washington street, about 4 feet apart, — one each side of the center line of…

2Cited by8 opinions

  1. Chauvin v. Detroit United RailwayMichigan Supreme Court · 1903
  2. Merritt v. FooteMichigan Supreme Court · 1901
  3. Roberts v. Terre Haute Electric Co.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1905
  4. Bennett v. Detroit Citizens' Street-Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1900
  5. Riggs v. Hot SpringsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1930

3 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