Ambrose v. Detroit Edison Co.
Michigan Supreme Court
1DissentBeeNNAN, J.
The sole question in this appeal is the propriety of granting a defendants’ motion to dismiss at the conclusion of the plaintiff’s opening statement. The decision below rested on the trial court’s finding that the opening statement consisted of conclusions and not facts and failed to state a cause of action. The action of the trial judge in granting dismissal was affirmed by the appellate Court, 5 Mich App 328, and this Court granted leave because the subject of the role of an opening statement is of general interest.
Plaintiff maintains that it is not necessary to state all of the elements of…
2Cases cited35 opinions
- Gunning v. CooleySupreme Court of the United States · 1930
- Humphrey's v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1935
- Oscanyan v. Arms Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1881
- Liverpool, New York & Philadelphia Steamship Co. v. Commissioners of EmigrationSupreme Court of the United States · 1885
- Best v. District of ColumbiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Latimer v. William Mueller & Son, Inc.Michigan Court of Appeals · 1986
- De Vito v. KatschAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990
- Young v. BarkerMichigan Court of Appeals · 1987
- Bader v. Iowa Metropolitan Sewer CompanySupreme Court of Iowa · 1970
- Bell v. MerrittMichigan Court of Appeals · 1982
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.