Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Ignotov v. Reiter

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided July 22, 1986No. 73095, (Calendar No. 16)Published

1ConcurrenceBoyle, J.

I concur in the result reached by Justice Levin.

The Court of Appeals in the case at bar clearly erred when it required the plaintiff to establish that "the proximate cause of his injury was defendant’s failure to appear at the termination hearing.” Ignotov v Reiter, 130 Mich App 409, 412; 343 NW2d 574 (1983) (emphasis added). It is well-established that in Michigan the burden is on the plaintiff to establish only that the defendant’s negligence is a proximate cause of the plaintiffs damages. Kirby v Larson, 400 Mich 585, 605; 256 NW2d 400 (1977); Sedorchuk v Weeder, 311 Mich 6, 10-11; 18 NW2d…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Kirby v. LarsonMichigan Supreme Court · 1977
  2. Barringer v. ArnoldMichigan Supreme Court · 1960
  3. Sutter v. BiggsMichigan Supreme Court · 1966
  4. Nielsen v. Henry H. Stevens, Inc.Michigan Supreme Court · 1962
  5. Sedorchuk v. WeederMichigan Supreme Court · 1945

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