Legal Opinion

Reno v. Heineman

Michigan Court of Appeals

Decided November 25, 1974No. Docket 14441PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtV. J. Brennan, J.

Plaintiff, Gerald W. Reno, brought this action against defendants under the dramshop act (MCLA 436.22; MSA 18.993) to recover damages for injuries he suffered when the car in which he was riding was struck by an automobile driven by an allegedly intoxicated Gary Schumann. The jury, after listening to all the proofs in the case, rendered a verdict of no cause of action in favor of all the defendants. Judgment to this effect was entered by the trial judge on April 3, 1972, and plaintiff’s motion for a new trial was denied on June 5, 1972. Plaintiff now appeals raising five alleged errors for…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Yonkus v. McKayMichigan Supreme Court · 1915
  2. Mason v. LovinsMichigan Court of Appeals · 1970
  3. Virgilio v. HartfieldMichigan Court of Appeals · 1966
  4. Stroh v. HinchmanMichigan Supreme Court · 1877
  5. Levyn v. KoppinMichigan Supreme Court · 1914

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

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Brewer v. Payless Stations, IncMichigan Supreme Court · 1982
  2. Tiffany v. the Christman Co.Michigan Court of Appeals · 1979
  3. Wilson v. W a Foote Memorial HospitalMichigan Court of Appeals · 1979
  4. Sheffield v. LewisSupreme Court of Georgia · 1980
  5. Croda v. SarnackiMichigan Court of Appeals · 1981

12 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