Legal Opinion

Roe v. Flamegas Industrial Corp.

Michigan Court of Appeals

Decided February 26, 1969No. Docket 5,111PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Pee Cueiam.

Plaintiff, Roe, began employment with defendant as a route salesman in September of 1966. Pursuant to his employment, plaintiff was required to obtain use of a truck. Plaintiff testified that he reached an agreement to purchase a truck from defendant and began payments of $50 per week. Defendant, to the contrary, alleg’d that their oral agreement merely provided that plaintiff rent the truck for $50 per week.

The trial court entered judgment for plaintiff, finding that he paid certain monies toward purchase of the truck, that the agreement for purchase was not in writing, that, this…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Endres v. Mara-Rickenbacker Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1928
  2. Sroka v. Catsman Transit-Mix Concrete, Inc.Michigan Supreme Court · 1957
  3. Chapman v. Colby Bros.Michigan Supreme Court · 1881
  4. Scarborough v. Detroit Operating Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1931
  5. Taggart ex rel. Jackson v. JamesMichigan Supreme Court · 1889

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company v. HayesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1970
  2. Whitcraft v. WolfeMichigan Court of Appeals · 1985
  3. Chrystler v. Geresy (In Re Brock)United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Michigan · 1981
  4. Pack v. Damon Corp.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 2004
  5. Besemer v. Estate of FjerstadMichigan Court of Appeals · 1973

1 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