Legal Opinion

Barto v. United States

District Court, E.D. Michigan

Decided May 28, 1993No. 2:92-cv-74240PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION AND ORDER REGARDING THE PARTIES’ CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

ROSEN, District Judge.

I. INTRODUCTION

This luxury tax refund case is before the Court on the parties’ Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment. The parties are in agreement that there is no genuine issue of material fact in this case, and resolution of this matter involves only the legal issue of whether a legally cognizable binding contract existed before September 30, 1990 between Plaintiff Robert Barto, as purchaser, and Estate Motors, Ltd., as seller, for the purchase of a new 1991 Mercedes-Benz 500SL automobile.

Having…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Aaron E. Levine & Co., Inc. v. Calkraft Paper Co.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 1976
  2. Challenge MacHinery Co. v. Mattison MacHine WorksMichigan Court of Appeals · 1984
  3. Komraus Plumbing & Heating, Inc, v. Cadillac Sands Motel, IncMichigan Supreme Court · 1972
  4. Thomaier v. Hoffman Chevrolet, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1978
  5. Michigan Bean Company v. SennMichigan Court of Appeals · 1979

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Extrusion Painting, Inc. v. Awnings Unlimited, Inc.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 1999
  2. Radiance Aluminum Fence, Inc. v. Marquis Metal Material Inc.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 2020

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

Powered by the Exa API