Legal Opinion

Bowerman v. Sheehan

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided April 3, 1928No. Docket No. 36PublishedCited by 38 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSharpe, J.

The question presented in Hawkins v. Ermatinger, 211 Mich. 578, is again before us. In that case the judgment of the trial court, based on a holding that, under section 4825, 1 Comp. Laws 1915, recovery might be had against the owner of a motor vehicle, when negligently driven by an immediate member of his family, was affirmed by an equal division of this court. The law is again attacked as unconstitutional.

When such a claim is made, what is the test to be applied by a court? This question received thoughtful consideration in the early case of Sears v. Cottrell, 5 Mich. 251. That decision has…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Munn v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
  2. Van Oster v. KansasSupreme Court of the United States · 1926
  3. Bertholf v. . O'ReillyNew York Court of Appeals · 1878
  4. People v. . HavnorNew York Court of Appeals · 1896
  5. Sears v. CottrellMichigan Supreme Court · 1858

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by38 opinions

  1. Naudzius v. LahrMichigan Supreme Court · 1931
  2. Cady v. City of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 1939
  3. People v. CunninghamMichigan Supreme Court · 2014
  4. Sexton v. Ryder Truck Rental, Inc.Michigan Supreme Court · 1982
  5. Caterpillar, Inc v. Department of TreasuryMichigan Supreme Court · 1992

33 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