Legal Opinion

Clark v. Chicago & West Michigan Railway Co.

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided July 8, 1886PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Error to Muskegon. (Russell, J.) Case. Defendant brings error. The facts are stated in the opinion and head-note.

1Opinion of the CourtChamplin, J.

The only negligence alleged in the declaration is that of the defendant in not maintaining a fence along the line and sides of its road-bed and track, as required by law.

It alleges that the defendant carelessly, negligently, and wrongfully permitted a certain portion of its fence to fall down, so that a gap or opening existed in its fence, which it did not repair, and had not repaired for some time prior thereto.

From the plaintiff’s testimony it appears that one Dyke Trumbull had a contract with defendant to deliver a quantity of railroad ties upon the right of way of defendant, and! had…

2Cited by2 opinions

  1. Mole v. MellonIdaho Supreme Court · 1928
  2. Mole v. MellonIdaho Supreme Court · 1928

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API