Legal Opinion

Taliaferro v. Pere Marquette Railway Co.

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided January 24, 1930No. Docket No. 136, Calendar No. 34,372PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtButzel, J.

Very early in the evening or late in the afternoon of October 30, 1925, plaintiff’s decedent was driving an automobile in a northerly direction on Division road, a paved thoroughfare in the village of Springwells, a suburb of Detroit. Defendant’s double tracks running in a southeasterly and northwesterly direction cross the road. There are no obstructions to the full view of the tracks from any part of Division road for a distance of 300 feet south of the crossing, from which direction decedent was coming. Whether it was dark or just becoming dusk is in dispute. There were neither lights nor…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Colborne v. Detroit United RailwayMichigan Supreme Court · 1913
  2. Molby v. Detroit United RailwayMichigan Supreme Court · 1922
  3. Kwiotkowski v. Grand Trunk Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1888
  4. Thomas v. Chicago & Grand Trunk Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1891
  5. Bates v. KitchelMichigan Supreme Court · 1911

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Reetz v. Kinsman Marine Transit Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1982
  2. Yates v. WenkMichigan Supreme Court · 1961
  3. Smith v. E. R. Squibb & Sons, Inc.Michigan Court of Appeals · 1976
  4. Schankin v. BuskirkMichigan Supreme Court · 1958
  5. Bourke v. North River InsuranceMichigan Court of Appeals · 1982

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