Legal Opinion

Hover v. Chrysler Corp.

Michigan Court of Appeals

Decided March 10, 1995No. Docket 156318PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Per curiam

Plaintiffs appeal as of right from an order of the Wayne Circuit Court granting defendants’ motion to dismiss on the ground that plaintiffs’ cause of action was barred by the applicable statute of limitations. MCR 2.116(C)(7). We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand for further proceedings.

This is a products liability action arising out of an automobile accident that occurred on February 5, 1989, in Alberta, Canada. Plaintiffs are Canadian residents. The automobile involved was a 1986 Jeep, manufactured by defendants. Dr. John Vincent Hover was the driver and his wife, Sara Jane Hover,…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Moll v. Abbott LaboratoriesMichigan Supreme Court · 1993
  2. Waldron v. Armstrong Rubber Co.Michigan Court of Appeals · 1975
  3. Makarow v. Volkswagen of America, IncMichigan Court of Appeals · 1987
  4. DeVito v. BlencMichigan Court of Appeals · 1973
  5. Belden v. BlackmanMichigan Supreme Court · 1898

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. CMACO Automotive Systems, Inc. v. Wanxiang America Corp.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2009
  2. Gillette Commercial Operations North America & Subsidiaries v. Department of TreasuryMichigan Court of Appeals · 2015
  3. City of Troy v. PapadelisMichigan Court of Appeals · 1998
  4. Boulton v. Fenton TownshipMichigan Court of Appeals · 2007
  5. People v. LynnMichigan Court of Appeals · 1997

5 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