Legal Opinion · Dissent

Martino v. Cottman Transmission Systems, Inc.

Michigan Court of Appeals

Decided September 27, 1996No. Docket 167208, 170567Published

1Dissent

Taylor, RJ.

(dissenting). I respectfully dissent.

While the majority pays lip service to the fact that the Pennsylvania judgment is entitled to full faith and credit under the federal constitution, its holding deprives the Pennsylvania judgment of the full faith and credit to which it is entitled. Under the Full Faith and Credit Clause, Michigan courts are barred from considering matters previously determined in a court of another state. Jones v State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins Co, 202 Mich App 393, 406; 509 NW2d 829 (1993). This constitutional provision also requires Michigan courts to give…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Commissioner v. SunnenSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
  2. Federated Department Stores, Inc. v. MoitieSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
  3. Cromwell v. County of SacSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
  4. Jrt, Inc. v. Tcby Systems, Inc. Tcby Enterprises, Inc. Americana Foods, Inc. Timothy David NickodemusCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1995
  5. Stanton v. DachilleMichigan Court of Appeals · 1990

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API