Legal Opinion

Hartman & Eichhorn Bldg. Co., Inc. v. Dailey

Michigan Court of Appeals

Decided August 3, 2005No. Docket 249847PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*547O’CONNELL, J.

This case requires us to reconsider the issue whether a building contractor can be liable under § 3 of the Michigan Consumer Protection Act.1 Although the Legislature apparently intended liability under the act to extend to individuals for their “conduct,” a building contractor’s construction or renovation of a house is regulated by the Occupational Code,2 so the remedy provisions in the MCPA3 should not apply. Smith v Globe Life Ins Co.4 Nevertheless, our decision in Forton v Laszar5 has already applied Smith to building contractors and found that the act of building a house…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Smith v. Globe Life InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 1999
  2. Warren Tool Co. v. StephensonMichigan Court of Appeals · 1968
  3. People v. BrownMichigan Court of Appeals · 2000
  4. Allen v. Morris Building Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1960
  5. Forton v. LaszarMichigan Court of Appeals · 2000

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Liss v. Lewiston-Richards, IncMichigan Supreme Court · 2007
  2. Elezovic v. Ford Motor Co.Michigan Court of Appeals · 2007
  3. Christensen v. Wausau Insurance CompaniesCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1987
  4. Galeana Telecommunications Investments, Inc. v. Amerifone Corp.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 2016
  5. Elezovic v. Ford Motor Co.Michigan Court of Appeals · 2007

2 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