Legal Opinion

Goldman v. Grand Trunk Western Railway Co.

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided February 2, 1939No. Docket Nos. 20, 21, Calendar Nos. 40,178, 40,179PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtNorth, J.

These two suits are simultaneously submitted. Plaintiff, Belle Goldman, by her suit seeks recovery for personal injuries suffered when she was struck by one of defendant’s locomotives. Her husband, Irving Goldman, prosecutes his action to recover for his losses, including medical and hospital expenses, loss of wife’s services, and damage to his automobile.

About 5 o’clock in the afternoon of November 29, 1935, Mrs. Goldman was driving east on Caniff street at the boundary line between the city of Detroit and the city of Hamtramek. It was misty and just getting dark, and although the street…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Chicago, St. Louis & Pittsburgh Railroad v. SpilkerIndiana Supreme Court · 1893
  2. Thompson v. . New York Central and Hudson River Rd. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1888
  3. H. H. King Flour Mills Co. v. Bay City Baking Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1927
  4. Arnell v. GordonMichigan Supreme Court · 1926
  5. Morgan v. Detroit, Jackson & Chicago RailwayMichigan Supreme Court · 1926

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Draws v. LevinMichigan Supreme Court · 1952
  2. Berry v. City of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 1955
  3. Ecker v. UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANYNebraska Supreme Court · 1957
  4. Sherman v. Flint Trolley Coach, Inc.Michigan Supreme Court · 1943
  5. Carlson v. Grand Trunk Western RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1944

2 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