Legal Opinion

Piquegno v. Chicago & Grand Trunk Railway Co.

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided October 31, 1883PublishedCited by 10 opinions

Error to St. Clair. (Stevens, J.) Case. Plaintiff brings error.

1Opinion of the CourtCooley, J.

Action for injury to the ' person. The declaration alleges that on' February 8, 1881, plaintiff was in the employ of defendant as a brakeman on a freight train running from Port Huron to Valparaiso, Indiana, through the city of Flint, and that defendant “did not carefully, skillfully and without negligence run its trains over said road, and did not keep such road and all its appurtenances in good, safe and proper condition, and did ndt keep its. station grounds and platforms, at the city of Flint aforesaid, free from ice, snow and other matter dangerous to the safety of persons employed on…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Davis v. Detroit & Milwaukee Rail RoadMichigan Supreme Court · 1870
  2. Michigan Central R. R. Co. v. SmithsonMichigan Supreme Court · 1881
  3. Fort Wayne, Jackson & Saginaw Railroad v. GildersleeveMichigan Supreme Court · 1876
  4. McGinnis v. Canada Southern Bridge Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1882
  5. Batterson v. Chicago & Grand Trunk Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1882

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Anderson v. Michigan Central RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1895
  2. Bates v. ShafferMichigan Supreme Court · 1921
  3. Shadford v. Ann Arbor Street Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1897
  4. Gillespie v. Grand Trunk Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1907
  5. Judd's Administratrix v. Southern Railway Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1916

5 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