Peck v. Michigan Cent. R. Co.
| Decision Date | 13 May 1885 |
| Citation | 23 N.W. 466,57 Mich. 3 |
| Court | Michigan Supreme Court |
| Parties | PECK v. MICHIGAN CENT. R. CO. |
Error to Jackson.
Thomas A. Wilson, for plaintiff and appellant.
Gibson & Parkinson, for defendant.
Mechanic street is one of the principal streets in the city of Jackson, running from the center of the city to the state's prison. The railroad belonging to defendant company crosses Mechanic street on a bridge some 15 feet above the highway. The railroads of the Jackson, Lansing & Saginaw Railroad Company cross Mechanic street, on a level therewith, about 50 feet north of defendant's road. This road is also used by the Grand River Valley Railroad Company. The Jackson, Lansing & Saginaw and the Grand River Valley Railroad Companies' roads are under the control of and operated by defendant. Clinton street runs west from Mechanic street and intersects it just south of the railroad bridge. The defendant has for several years employed a flag-man who was stationed at the intersection of the Jackson, Lansing & Saginaw Railroad with Mechanic street, whose duty it was to prevent, so far as he could do so, accidents at the crossing of the Jackson Lansing & Saginaw railroad with Mechanic street. He had received no instructions relative to performing any duty with reference to the passing of trains upon the Michigan Central Railroad, but he had, on his own responsibility assumed to warn travelers with vehicles upon Mechanic street of the approach of trains on the defendant's road, which would pass over the bridge in question. The diagram will indicate the position of the streets and roads referred to:
(Image Omitted) On the twenty-first of November, 1881, the plaintiff and her sister were passing along Mechanic street in a buggy drawn by a single horse. They approached the railroad bridge from the south, and when within about 10 rods from the bridge, they saw the flag-man stationed at the crossing making signals for them to stop. They were about to do so, when he again signaled them to go forward, which they did, and had nearly reached the bridge when a passenger train from the west passed over the bridge in front of and nearly over them. She turned her horse to the west, when he threw up his head, gave a spring to the west, and threw her out. She was driving the horse at the time of the accident. When she fell from the buggy she dropped the lines, and the horse started to run on Clinton street, but was stopped in a short distance by her sister who remained in the buggy and recovered the lines. The plaintiff was seriously injured.
The plaintiff in her declaration alleges that it was necessary and the duty of the defendant, to have and keep, and the defendant then and there kept, a flag-man at the place where said railroads...
To continue reading
Request your trial