Poole v. Consolidated Street Railway Co.

25 L.R.A. 744, 59 N.W. 390, 100 Mich. 379, 1894 Mich. LEXIS 821
CourtMichigan Supreme Court
DecidedMay 22, 1894
StatusPublished
Cited by14 cases

This text of 25 L.R.A. 744 (Poole v. Consolidated Street Railway 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
Poole v. Consolidated Street Railway Co., 25 L.R.A. 744, 59 N.W. 390, 100 Mich. 379, 1894 Mich. LEXIS 821 (Mich. 1894).

Opinion

Montgomery, J.

The defendant operates an. electric street railroad in Grand Rapids, with a line extending to Reed’s Lake, which is a summer resort a short distance east of the city. The company maintains pleasure grounds at this place, including a pavilion and conveniences for visitors. During „the summer, the travel over this route is very large. Eor the convenient transaction of its business, the company’s double track is extended and formed into a' ■loop at the Reed’s Lake terminus, so that cars may run continuously, without reversing or switching, around this loop, and back to the city. Within this loop is vacant ground, and, on the side to the north, nearest the pavilion, cinders hav.e been spread, connecting with the walk and the pavilion, and forming an admittedly safe landing place. The sketch on next page sufficiently shows the surroundings to indicate the situation.

On the evening of the 12th of August, 1892, the plaintiff, who had taken passage on one of defendant’s cars, in attempting, after the car came to a,stop, to alight inside of the loop, received serious injuries.- She brought this suit against the company, alleging that the defendant did

[382]*382 hY9LRpAvY4

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

Related

Clingerman v. Bruce
160 N.W.2d 614 (Michigan Court of Appeals, 1968)
Decker v. Wofford
104 N.W.2d 760 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1960)
Gapske v. Hatch
81 N.W.2d 337 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1957)
Schattilly v. Yonker
81 N.W.2d 343 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1957)
Caley v. Kansas City, Missouri & Kansas City Public Service Co.
48 S.W.2d 25 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1932)
Caley v. K.C., Mo. K.C. Pub. Serv. Co.
48 S.W.2d 25 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1932)
Wentz v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad
168 S.W. 1166 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1914)
Florida East Coast Railway Co. v. Carter
65 So. 254 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1914)
Spurrier Lumber Co. v. Dodson
1911 OK 517 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1911)
Selby v. Detroit Railway
104 N.W. 376 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1905)
Fillingham v. St. Louis Transit Co.
77 S.W. 314 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1903)
Richard v. Detroit, Rochester, Romeo & Lake Orion Railway
89 N.W. 52 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1902)
Hennig v. Globe Foundry Co.
71 N.W. 156 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1897)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
25 L.R.A. 744, 59 N.W. 390, 100 Mich. 379, 1894 Mich. LEXIS 821, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/poole-v-consolidated-street-railway-co-mich-1894.