Legal Opinion
Brassel v. Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Railway Co.
Michigan Supreme Court
Decided June 16, 1894PublishedCited by 14 opinions
Error to Schoolcraft. (Stéere, J.) Case. Defendant brings error. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtGrant, J.
Plaintiff claims that he was unlawfully ejected from a passenger car of the defendant’s train while it was in motion, and was injured. »
1. In his original declaration, plaintiff alleged that—
“The said plaintiff, after purchasing the said ticket, and on, to wit, the said 19th day of November, went on the cars of the said defendant from .Manistique to Hunt’s Spur, and afterwards, to wit, entered a car of the said defendant, on one of its passenger trains, to return to Manistique; and, relying upon the representations made by *8the agent of the defendant at the time of the purchase of the said…
2Cited by14 opinions
- Hintz v. Michigan Central RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1903
- Bernard v. Grand Rapids Paper Box Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1912
- Gregory v. Detroit United RailwayMichigan Supreme Court · 1904
- Crowe v. Michigan Central RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1906
- Mitchell v. PerkinsMichigan Supreme Court · 1952
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.