Balicki v. New York Cent. R. Co.

293 N.W. 892, 294 Mich. 639, 1940 Mich. LEXIS 802
Michigan Supreme Court·Decided October 7, 1940·No. Docket No. 39, Calendar No. 40,722.·Published

Opinion

This suit arose out of the same accident as Perch v. RailroadCo., ante, 227. The controlling facts and applicable law are the same in the two cases. In the Perch Case on rehearing a majority of the court held that under the record the defendant was entitled as a matter of law to judgment in its favor. Accordingly judgment for defendant by direction of the trial judge in the instant case must be affirmed. Costs to appellee.

BUSHNELL, C.J., and SHARPE, BOYLES, CHANDLER, McALLISTER, WIEST, and BUTZEL, JJ., concurred. *Page 640

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Balicki v. New York Cent. R. Co., 293 N.W. 892, 294 Mich. 639, 1940 Mich. LEXIS 802 (Mich. 1940).

293 N.W. 892 (Balicki v. New York Cent. R. Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.