Legal Opinion

Harshaw v. Bethany Christian Services

District Court, W.D. Michigan

Decided February 25, 2010No. Case No. 1:08-cv-104PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION and ORDER

“Harshaw 5”

PAUL L. MALONEY, Chief Judge.

Granting Defendants’ Motion to Declare that Virginia Substantive Law Governs these Claims; Directing the Parties to Brief the Corporate Alter Ego Issue under Virginia Law; Scheduling Oral Argument on the Corporate Alter Ego Issue

This is a diversity tort case. Plaintiffs William and Julie Harshaw (“Harshaw”), a married couple proceeding individually and as guardians of their son Roman, are Virginia citizens; both defendants — Bethany Christian Services and Bethany Christian Services International, Inc. (together “BCS”) are Michigan…

2Cases cited65 opinions

  1. Zenith Radio Corp. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1969
  2. Commissioner v. Estate of BoschSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  3. West v. American Telephone & Telegraph Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1940
  4. Placek v. City of Sterling HeightsMichigan Supreme Court · 1979
  5. Fidelity Union Trust Co. v. FieldSupreme Court of the United States · 1941

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Harshaw v. Bethany Christian ServicesDistrict Court, W.D. Michigan · 2010
  2. Jessica Guarnaschelli v. Medpace, Inc.District Court, S.D. Ohio · 2026
  3. William v. BETHANY CHRISTIAN SERVICESDistrict Court, W.D. Michigan · 2010

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

Powered by the Exa API