Legal Opinion

Hill v. Clark Equipment Co.

Michigan Court of Appeals

Decided August 7, 1978No. Docket 27085PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtM. J. Kelly, P. J.

Pursuant to a grant of rehearing dated March 15, 1978, we are persuaded, albeit reluctantly, that, adhering to our previous decisions that Alabama law applies in this case, we must reverse and remand for trial on Count IV of plaintiff’s complaint alleging strict liability in tort under 2 Restatement Torts, 2d, § 402A, pp 347-348, because that issue has been properly preserved by plaintiff’s presentation and representation of same both to the lower court and to this Court.

We reiterate the finding expressed in our order of March 15, 1978, that under the Alabama cases of Casrell v Altec…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Abendschein v. FarrellMichigan Supreme Court · 1969
  2. Bostrom v. JenningsMichigan Supreme Court · 1949
  3. Kaiser v. NorthMichigan Supreme Court · 1939
  4. Sweeney v. SweeneyMichigan Supreme Court · 1978
  5. Hill v. Clark Equipment Co.Michigan Court of Appeals · 1972

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Sexton v. Ryder Truck Rental, Inc.Michigan Supreme Court · 1982
  2. Korzetz v. Amsted Industries, Inc.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 1979
  3. Thorin v. Bloomfield Hills Board of EducationMichigan Court of Appeals · 1994
  4. Penwest Development Corp. Ltd. v. Dow Chemical Co.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 1987
  5. General Motors Corp. v. National Auto Radiator Manufacturing Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1982

5 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