Legal Opinion
Kiefer v. May
Michigan Court of Appeals
Decided April 25, 1973No. Docket 14025PublishedCited by 35 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtFitzgerald, J.
The nature of the summary proceedings in the trial court requires that pertinent facts be extrapolated from the pleadings and plaintiff-appellant’s brief. Defendant-appellee did not file a brief.
Plaintiff is a resident of Michigan and defendant resides in Arizona. Defendant placed an advertisement in a national publication, Hemming Motor News, May, 1970 edition, circulated in Michigan. The advertisement was for the sale of a 1931 Cadillac. Plaintiff responded by calling defendant in Arizona. By telephone, defendant represented that the automobile was almost entirely complete. Relying on this…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- International Shoe Co. v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Hanson v. DencklaSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
- Simonson v. International BankNew York Court of Appeals · 1964
- Sifers v. HorenMichigan Supreme Court · 1971
- Koplin v. Thomas, Haab & BottsAppellate Court of Illinois · 1966
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by35 opinions
- Joan Elena Lanier v. The American Board of Endodontics and the American Association of Endodontists, a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1988
- Witbeck v. Bill Cody's Ranch InnMichigan Supreme Court · 1987
- Thermal Insulation Systems, Inc. v. Ark-Seal Corp.District Court, D. Kansas · 1980
- Oberlies v. Searchmont Resort, IncMichigan Court of Appeals · 2001
- Four Seasons Gardening & Landscaping, Inc. v. CrouchCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1984
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.