Legal Opinion

Reinert v. Dolezel

Michigan Court of Appeals

Decided October 14, 1985No. Docket 78909, 78910PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Per curiam

Both plaintiffs appeal from grants of partial summary judgments against them. The appeals were consolidated by the Court of Appeals. The two cases arose out of the same automobile accident but were heard before different trial judges of the Oakland County Circuit Court, both judges concluding that defendants David and Joan Dolezel had no common-law duty to prevent their 18-year-old son from drinking alcoholic beverages in their home or to provide safe transportation for his similarly-aged friends.

Five young people, all but one of them at least 18 years old, including David Dolezel, Jr., age…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Wilson v. SteinbachWashington Supreme Court · 1982
  2. Congini by Congini v. PORTERSVILLE ETC.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
  3. Abel v. Eli Lilly & Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1984
  4. Zeni v. AndersonMichigan Supreme Court · 1976
  5. Romeo v. Van OtterlooMichigan Court of Appeals · 1982

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Martin v. WattsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1987
  2. Boyle v. OdetteMichigan Court of Appeals · 1988
  3. Scott Kukesh & a. v. Beverly P. Mutrie, Individually and as Trustee of the Beverly P. Mutrie Revocable TrustSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2015
  4. Martin v. WattsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1987
  5. Bambino v. DunnMichigan Court of Appeals · 1988

5 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