Legal Opinion

Walker v. Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Co.

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided April 16, 1895PublishedCited by 23 opinions

Error to Kalamazoo. (Back, J.). Negligence case. Defendant brings error. The facts áre stated in the opinions.

1Opinion of the CourtMontgomery, J.

This action is instituted to recover damages sustained by the wife and children of deceased by his death, which is alleged to have occurred through the negligent fault of defendant.

Deceased had been in the employ of defendant company for some time as a section boss. His duties were to maintain his section of track, and keep it in good repair for the safe passage of trains and traffic on the road generally. Henry H. Houghton was the road-master of the Kalamazoo Division of defendant’s road, having headquarters at Kalamazoo, and was the superior of deceased. Some time prior to April 11, 1893,…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Pittsburgh, Cincinnati & St. Louis Railway Co. v. AdamsIndiana Supreme Court · 1886
  2. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co. v. BayfieldMichigan Supreme Court · 1877
  3. Hurst v. Detroit City RailwayMichigan Supreme Court · 1891
  4. Smith v. Peninsular Car WorksMichigan Supreme Court · 1886
  5. Cooper v. Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1887

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

3Cited by23 opinions

  1. Courtney v. AppleMichigan Supreme Court · 1956
  2. Motsenbocker v. Shawnee Gas & Electric Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1915
  3. Rouse v. Detroit Electric RailwayMichigan Supreme Court · 1901
  4. Garrity v. Detroit Citizens' Street Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1897
  5. Ormsbee v. Grand Trunk Western Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1917

18 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