Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Foodland Distributors v. Al-Naimi

Michigan Court of Appeals

Decided February 25, 1997No. Docket 178201Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partO’Connell, P.J.

Plaintiff Foodland Distributors, a grocery wholesaler, alleged in the lower court that defendants (other than Michigan National Bank) purchased nearly $700,000 in groceries from plaintiff and failed to pay for the purchase. Following a seven-day bench trial, the circuit court issued a written opinion finding no cause of action. Plaintiff appeals as of right, arguing that portions of the trial court’s ruling were erroneous and should be reversed. For the reasons stated herein, I would reverse the lower court decision in part and remand with directions.

I. THE PARTIES

Plaintiff Foodland…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Hi-Way Motor Co. v. International Harvester Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1976
  2. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. BlackMichigan Supreme Court · 1981
  3. Candler v. HeighoMichigan Supreme Court · 1919
  4. Miller v. KaiserSupreme Court of Colorado · 1967
  5. Danto v. Charles C. Robbins, Inc.Michigan Supreme Court · 1930

12 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