Legal Opinion

Brunet v. Decorative Engineering, Inc

Michigan Court of Appeals

Decided February 9, 1996No. Docket 178683PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMackenzie, P.J.

Defendants appeal as of right from an opinion and order granting plaintiffs’ motion for entry of a consent judgment. We reverse.

The basic facts are undisputed. Plaintiff Brunet (hereinafter plaintiff) is a former sales representative of defendant Decorative Engineering, Inc. Defendant Mouland (hereinafter defendant) is the president and sole shareholder of Decorative Engineering. Plaintiff brought this action for breach of contract and misrepresentation, claiming that he was entitled to certain compensation, including *432commissions, under the parties’ sales representative agreement.

At…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Kennedy v. HydeTexas Supreme Court · 1984
  2. Groulx v. CarlsonMichigan Court of Appeals · 1989
  3. Michigan Bell Telephone Company v. SfatMichigan Court of Appeals · 1989
  4. Rossi v. Transamerica Car Leasing Co.Michigan Court of Appeals · 1984
  5. Rossi v. Transamerica Car Leasing Co.Michigan Court of Appeals · 1985

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Michigan Mutual Insurance v. Indiana InsuranceMichigan Court of Appeals · 2001
  2. Brunet v. Decorative Engineering, IncMichigan Court of Appeals · 1996
  3. Central Warehouse Operations Inc v. Patrick RiffelMichigan Court of Appeals · 2015

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

Powered by the Exa API