Carr v. St. Clair Tunnel Co.

Michigan Supreme Court

Carr v. St. Clair Tunnel Co.

92 N.W. 110, 131 Mich. 592, 1902 Mich. LEXIS 698

CourtMichigan Supreme Court

DecidedNovember 11, 1902

DocketDocket No. 36

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 92 N.W. 110 (Carr v. St. Clair Tunnel Co.) 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

Carr v. St. Clair Tunnel Co., 92 N.W. 110, 131 Mich. 592, 1902 Mich. LEXIS 698 (Mich. 1902).

Pincite

Opinion

Grant, J.

(after stating the facts). Making flying switches is a method in common use by the railroad companies of this country. It was not, therefore, negligence on the part of the defendant to do this work in the usual and customary way. 3 Elliott, R. R. § 1274; Schaible v. Railway Co., 97 Mich. 318 (56 N. W. 565, 21 L. R. A. 660); Pahlan v. Railway Co., 122 Mich. 232 (81 N. W. 103). Other courts have recognized this practice as existing in most pf the railroad yards in the country, and have therefore held that it does not constitute negligence as to employes. Hunt v. Hurd, 39 C. C. A. 226, 98 Fed. 683.

Plaintiff had assisted in making these flying switches for eight days previous to the accident, and made no objection. He therefore assumed the risk. Youll v. Railway Co., 66 Iowa, 346 (23 N. W. 736); Jolly v. Railroad Co., 93 Mich. 370 (53 N. W. 526); Kelley v. Railway Co., 53 Wis. 74 (9 N. W. 816); Fordyce v. Lowman, 57 Ark. 160 (20 S. W. 1090); Bengtson v. Railway Co., 47 Minn. 486 (50 N. W. 531); Coombs v. Railroad Co., 156 Mass. 200 (30 N. E. 1140).

Judgment affirmed.

Hooker, C. J., Moore and Montgomery, JJ., concurred.

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

Grant, J.

(after stating the facts). Making flying switches is a method in common use by the railroad companies of this country. It was not, therefore, negligence on the part of the defendant to do this work in the usual and customary way. 3 Elliott, R. R. § 1274; Schaible v. Railway Co., 97 Mich. 318 (56 N. W. 565, 21 L. R. A. 660); Pahlan v. Railway Co., 122 Mich. 232 (81 N. W. 103). Other courts have recognized this practice as existing in most pf the railroad yards in the country, and have therefore held that it does not constitute negligence as to employes. Hunt v. Hurd, 39 C. C. A. 226, 98 Fed. 683.

Plaintiff had assisted in making these flying switches for eight days previous to the accident, and made no objection. He therefore assumed the risk. Youll v. Railway Co., 66 Iowa, 346 (23 N. W. 736); Jolly v. Railroad Co., 93 Mich. 370 (53 N. W. 526); Kelley v. Railway Co., 53 Wis. 74 (9 N. W. 816); Fordyce v. Lowman, 57 Ark. 160 (20 S. W. 1090); Bengtson v. Railway Co., 47 Minn. 486 (50 N. W. 531); Coombs v. Railroad Co., 156 Mass. 200 (30 N. E. 1140).

Judgment affirmed.

Hooker, C. J., Moore and Montgomery, JJ., concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

92 N.W. 110, 131 Mich. 592, 1902 Mich. LEXIS 698, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/carr-v-st-clair-tunnel-co-mich-1902.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack