Legal Opinion

Buffa v. Dyck

Michigan Court of Appeals

Decided July 19, 1984No. Docket 71207PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Per curiam

Plaintiffs appeal as of right from an order of summary judgment in favor of defendant. Defendant filed her motion under both GCR 1963, 117.2, subds (1) and (3), and the trial court appeared to decide the motion under GCR 1963, 117.2(1), holding that "no factual development could possibly justify a right to recovery”. In its opinion, however, the trial court relied upon facts developed by the parties on discovery and not alleged in the complaint, an improper basis in deciding a motion for summary judgment under GCR 1963, 117.2(1). Blake v Consolidated R Co, 129 Mich App 535, 543; 342 NW2d 599…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Anderson v. Kemper InsuranceMichigan Court of Appeals · 1983
  2. Weider v. GoldsmithMichigan Supreme Court · 1958
  3. Hughes v. City of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 1953
  4. Woodworth v. BrennerMichigan Court of Appeals · 1976
  5. Blake v. Consolidated Rail Corp.Michigan Court of Appeals · 1983

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Zielinski v. SzokolaMichigan Court of Appeals · 1988
  2. Devine v. Al’s Lounge, IncMichigan Court of Appeals · 1989
  3. Kelly L. Woods v. Sing Szechuan Restaurant, LLCCourt of Appeals of Virginia · 2025
  4. Land v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1995

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

Powered by the Exa API