Longstreth v. Gensel
Michigan Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtCavanagh, J.
The issue presented is whether *678plaintiffs can maintain a cause of action based on violation of MCL 436.33; MSA 18.1004, which prohibits a person from knowingly selling or furnishing alcoholic liquor to a person under twenty-one years of age, against persons who are social hosts.
I
The trial court granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment on the basis of a failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. GCR 1963, 117,2(1). A motion brought under this subrule tests the legal sufficiency of plaintiffs’ complaint. The motion should be granted only if the claims are so clearly…
2Cases cited43 opinions
- Rappaport v. NicholsSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1959
- Vesely v. SagerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
- Kelly v. GwinnellSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1984
- Congini by Congini v. PORTERSVILLE ETC.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
- Abel v. Eli Lilly & Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1984
38 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by97 opinions
- Gordon Sel-Way, Inc. v. Spence Bros.Michigan Supreme Court · 1991
- Lash v. City of Traverse CityMichigan Supreme Court · 2007
- Orzel v. Scott Drug Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1995
- Sparks v. SparksMichigan Supreme Court · 1992
- Reeder v. DanielTexas Supreme Court · 2001
92 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.