Legal Opinion

Maiuri v. Sinacola Construction Co.

Michigan Court of Appeals

Decided August 20, 1968No. Docket 2,886PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLesinski, C. J.

The plaintiffs, Pasquale Maiuri and Amelia Maiuri, seek damages from the defendant, Sinacola Construction Company, for the loss of companionship of their son, Albert Dominic Maiuri, who died from injuries sustained when a chunk of earth fell and crushed his skull. The accident happened on July 30, 1964, while the deceased, in the defendant’s employ, was connecting pipe in a 27' deep trench. At the time of his death, Albert Maiuri was 24 years old, unmarried, and was living at home with his parents. The defendant company was subject to the provisions of the Michigan workmen’s compensation act,…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Bradford Electric Light Co. v. ClapperSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
  2. Montgomery v. StephanMichigan Supreme Court · 1960
  3. Currie v. FitingMichigan Supreme Court · 1965
  4. Herman v. TheisMichigan Court of Appeals · 1968
  5. Moran v. Nafi CorporationMichigan Supreme Court · 1963

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Maiuri v. Sinacola Construction Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1969
  2. West v. ZeibellWashington Supreme Court · 1976
  3. Simkins v. General Motors Corp.Michigan Supreme Court · 1996
  4. Lock v. JacksonMichigan Court of Appeals · 1969
  5. Simkins v. General Motors Corp.Michigan Supreme Court · 1996

1 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