Bowen v. City of Detroit

Michigan Supreme Court

Bowen v. City of Detroit

114 N.W. 344, 150 Mich. 546, 1907 Mich. LEXIS 845

CourtMichigan Supreme Court

DecidedDecember 30, 1907

DocketDocket No. 151

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 114 N.W. 344 (Bowen v. City of Detroit) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Michigan Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bowen v. City of Detroit, 114 N.W. 344, 150 Mich. 546, 1907 Mich. LEXIS 845 (Mich. 1907).

Pincite

Opinion

Grant, J

.'{after stating the facts). The sole claim of the plaintiff is that the defendant city caused the obstruction by digging the trench and throwing the ice and snow across the path cleared for foot passengers. The court based its ruling upon the testimony of the witness Clemens, holding that there was nothing in the.case tending to cast doubt upon his testimony. In this we think the court erred. According tp the testimony of the witness Cahalan there was a ridge about eight inches high across the path, close to the trench, composed of ice and snow, which a jury might infer was thrown there by those who dug the trench and cleared the path. Mr. Clemens testified that the work was finished about six hours before the accident happened.

We are unable to say, upon this record, that the testimony of Clemens conclusively established the fact that he left the path free from obstruction from curb to curb a few hours before.

Judgment reversed, and new trial granted.

McAlvay, O. J., and Carpenter, Blair, and Moore, JJ., concurred.

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

Grant, J

.'{after stating the facts). The sole claim of the plaintiff is that the defendant city caused the obstruction by digging the trench and throwing the ice and snow across the path cleared for foot passengers. The court based its ruling upon the testimony of the witness Clemens, holding that there was nothing in the.case tending to cast doubt upon his testimony. In this we think the court erred. According tp the testimony of the witness Cahalan there was a ridge about eight inches high across the path, close to the trench, composed of ice and snow, which a jury might infer was thrown there by those who dug the trench and cleared the path. Mr. Clemens testified that the work was finished about six hours before the accident happened.

We are unable to say, upon this record, that the testimony of Clemens conclusively established the fact that he left the path free from obstruction from curb to curb a few hours before.

Judgment reversed, and new trial granted.

McAlvay, O. J., and Carpenter, Blair, and Moore, JJ., concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

114 N.W. 344, 150 Mich. 546, 1907 Mich. LEXIS 845, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bowen-v-city-of-detroit-mich-1907.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack