Strand v. Chicago & West Michigan Railway Co.
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Kent. (Montgomery, J.) Case. Plaintiff brings error. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
Campbell, O. J.
Plaintiff fell when leaving one of defendant’s trains, and had his foot crushed. He sued for damages, and the court refused to allow him to recover, because he was held to have been contributory by negligence to the injury. The case comes up on error, and he claims he had a right to have the jury pass on the facts.
*218In such, a case the plaintiff has a right to have his own side of the controversy assumed to be true, and it cannot be affected by counter-proofs. There was in this case some conflict on material facts, and on the argument, through inadvertence, allusion was made more…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Cousins v. Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1893
- Strand v. Chicago & West Michigan Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1887
- Fehnrich ex rel. Fehnrich v. Michigan Central RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1891
- Smalley v. Detroit & Mackinac Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1902
- McCaslin v. Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1892
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.