Legal Opinion

Poundstone v. Niles Creamery

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided June 3, 1940No. Docket No. 45, Calendar No. 40,665PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtButzel, J.

We granted leave to appeal in the nature of mandamus to review the refusal of the trial court to grant defendant’s motion for judgment of no cause of action. A motion for directed verdict was timely made at the close of plaintiff’s proofs, and the case was submitted to the jury under the Empson act (3 Comp. Laws 1929, § 14531 et seq. [Stat. Ann. § 27.1461 et seq.]). The jury were unable to agree.

The motion for judgment upon disagreement of the jury is authorized by 3 Comp. Laws 1929, § 14535 (Stat. Ann. § 27.1471), which provides:

“Section 1. Hereafter in all civil actions at law, in courts of…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Frye v. City of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 1932
  2. Warwick v. BlackneyMichigan Supreme Court · 1935
  3. Elsey v. J. L. Hudson Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1915
  4. Heppenstall Steel Co. v. Wabash Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1928
  5. Pomeroy v. DykemaMichigan Supreme Court · 1931

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

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Kaminski v. Grand Trunk Western RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1956
  2. Gunlock v. New Frontier Hotel Corp.Nevada Supreme Court · 1962
  3. Hopkins v. LakeMichigan Supreme Court · 1957
  4. Daigneau v. YoungMichigan Supreme Court · 1957
  5. In Re Estate of MillerMichigan Supreme Court · 1942

15 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