Legal Opinion

Jarman v. Chicago & Grand Trunk Railway Co.

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided December 8, 1893PublishedCited by 6 opinions

Error to Calhoun. (Smith, J.) Negligence case. Defendant brings error. Reversed. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtGrant, J.

Plaintiff was a fireman on one of defendant’s passenger engines. His train passed a freight train standing upon a side track. One of the cars of the freight train was a flat car loaded with small elm trees. As his train passed, he claims that a small limb from one of these trees projected against and into the cab where he was sitting, and struck his eye, injuring it. These trees were loaded with their butts at the ends of the car and the tops in the center. They were held in place by six stakes on each side and two at each end, and by wires running across from the tops of the stakes, and…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Smith v. PotterMichigan Supreme Court · 1881
  2. Enright v. Toledo, Ann Arbor & North Michigan Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1892

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. McDonald v. Michigan Central RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1895
  2. Loranger v. Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1895
  3. Lellis v. Michigan Central RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1900
  4. Wickham v. Detroit United RailwayMichigan Supreme Court · 1910
  5. Miller v. Michigan Central RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1900

1 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