Zulke v. Michigan Central Railroad

Michigan Supreme Court

Zulke v. Michigan Central Railroad

110 N.W. 493, 147 Mich. 192, 1907 Mich. LEXIS 889

CourtMichigan Supreme Court

DecidedFebruary 5, 1907

DocketDocket No. 4

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 110 N.W. 493 (Zulke v. Michigan Central Railroad) 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

Zulke v. Michigan Central Railroad, 110 N.W. 493, 147 Mich. 192, 1907 Mich. LEXIS 889 (Mich. 1907).

Pincite

Opinion

Grant, J.

(after stating the facts). It was the duty of the deceased to watch for trains passing over all these tracks, and warn travelers by waving a white flag. Under plaintiff’s theory it was the duty of the railroad company to employ a flagman to protect travelers by notifying them of the approach of trains, and then to protect the flagman by having some one notify him of their approach. The witnesses all agree that the deceased could have seen the train coming by a simple turn of the head. He was not required to walk or stand on the track. He could have taken two steps to one side and have been in a perfectly safe place, and a place equally as effective for warning travelers. His own negligence was the cause of his death. The learned circuit judge said:

[194]*194“As a matter of law, I would do violence to my judgment of the law if I did otherwise than grant the motion of the defendant and direct a verdict for the defendant. I have not been able to understand from the first of this case how the company can be responsible for his death.”

The judgment is affirmed.

McAlvay, C. J., and Blair, Ostrander, and Hooker, JJ., concurred.

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

Grant, J.

(after stating the facts). It was the duty of the deceased to watch for trains passing over all these tracks, and warn travelers by waving a white flag. Under plaintiff’s theory it was the duty of the railroad company to employ a flagman to protect travelers by notifying them of the approach of trains, and then to protect the flagman by having some one notify him of their approach. The witnesses all agree that the deceased could have seen the train coming by a simple turn of the head. He was not required to walk or stand on the track. He could have taken two steps to one side and have been in a perfectly safe place, and a place equally as effective for warning travelers. His own negligence was the cause of his death. The learned circuit judge said:

[194]*194“As a matter of law, I would do violence to my judgment of the law if I did otherwise than grant the motion of the defendant and direct a verdict for the defendant. I have not been able to understand from the first of this case how the company can be responsible for his death.”

The judgment is affirmed.

McAlvay, C. J., and Blair, Ostrander, and Hooker, JJ., concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

110 N.W. 493, 147 Mich. 192, 1907 Mich. LEXIS 889, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/zulke-v-michigan-central-railroad-mich-1907.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack