Legal Opinion

St. John v. General Motors Corp.

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided April 3, 1944No. Docket No. 13, Calendar No. 42,459PublishedCited by 21 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

"Wiest, J.

This action at law was commenced April 7, 1938, by plaintiff, in her own behalf and as assignee of 28 other women, against the General Motors Corporation to recover the difference in wages paid them, as women employees, and men engaged in similar industrial employment in the Olds Motor Works Division of defendant at the city of ■Lansing, Michigan. This civil action is based upon Act No. 239, Pub. Acts 1919 (2 Comp. Laws 1929, §§8497, 8498), now section 556 of the penal code, Act No. 328, Pub. Acts 1931 (Comp. Laws Supp. 1940, §17115-556, Stat. Ann. §28.824), which provides :

“Any…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Bolden v. Grand Rapids Operating Corp.Michigan Supreme Court · 1927
  2. In re MoserMichigan Supreme Court · 1904
  3. General Motors Corp. v. Attorney GeneralMichigan Supreme Court · 1940
  4. Morley Bros. v. F. R. Patterson Construction Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1934
  5. Hudson v. EnichenMichigan Supreme Court · 1944

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. Pompey v. General Motors Corp.Michigan Supreme Court · 1971
  2. Heurtebise v. Reliable Business Computers, IncMichigan Supreme Court · 1996
  3. King v. General Motors Corp.Michigan Court of Appeals · 1984
  4. Paramount Pictures Corp. v. MiskinisMichigan Supreme Court · 1984
  5. Schroeder v. Dayton-Hudson Corp.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 1978

16 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