Legal Opinion
Novak v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance
Michigan Court of Appeals
Decided September 10, 1999No. Docket 204162PublishedCited by 115 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtMackenzie, P.J.
Plaintiff Terry Novak (plaintiff), who alleged that the Nationwide defendants (defendants) illegally terminated his position as an insurance sales agent because they found his Detroit-area clients economically undesirable, appeals as of right from an order granting defendants’ motion for summary disposition of his nine-count complaint. We affirm.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
In August 1991, in anticipation of assuming responsibility for his father’s insurance agency, Novak & Associates Insurance, Inc., plaintiff signed an employment agreement with defendants. Among other things, the agreement specified…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Havens Realty Corp. v. ColemanSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Gladstone, Realtors v. Village of BellwoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Quinto v. Cross and Peters Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1996
- People v. StanawayMichigan Supreme Court · 1994
- Phinney v. PerlmutterMichigan Court of Appeals · 1997
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by115 opinions
- Mekani v. Homecomings Financial, LLCDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 2010
- Zaremba Equipment, Inc. v. Harco National InsuranceMichigan Court of Appeals · 2008
- John MacDonald, Jr. v. Thomas M. Cooley Law SchoolCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2013
- Bergen v. BakerMichigan Court of Appeals · 2005
- Oliver v. SmithMichigan Court of Appeals · 2010
110 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.