Breckon v. Franklin Fuel Co.
Michigan Supreme Court
1ConcurrenceT. G. Kavanagh, J.
I agree with Justice Black that loss of companionship is not a “pecuniary injury” or “pecuniary loss”, and for that reason I concur in reversal for I perceive this to be the only issue necessary to decision in this case.
A fair reading of the rest of his opinion however leads to the conclusion that he would hold compensation for “pecuniary injuries” is recoverable only by dependents.
*280Nothing in the death act or the probate code (as it stands since amendment in 1965, MOLA § 702.115 (Stat Ann 1969 Cum Supp § 27.3178[185]) persuades me that compensation for pecuniary injuries may not be recovered…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Montgomery v. StephanMichigan Supreme Court · 1960
- Wycko v. GnodtkeMichigan Supreme Court · 1960
- Hyatt v. AdamsMichigan Supreme Court · 1867
- Currie v. FitingMichigan Supreme Court · 1965
- Hurst v. Detroit City RailwayMichigan Supreme Court · 1891
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.