Legal Opinion
Rush v. Pierson Contracting Co.
District Court, E.D. Michigan
Decided March 31, 1970No. Civ. No. 27592PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
THORNTON, District Judge.
This is an action for negligence, the plaintiffs, citizens of the State of Indiana, having received personal injuries when their car skidded and crashed while traveling on a highway overpass in the Township of Watervliet, Michigan. Both corporate defendants have moved for summary judgment in their respective favors.
The Amended Complaint of the plaintiffs recites, in part, the following:
“2. Defendant Pierson Contracting Company and Defendant Owen-Ames-Kimball Company, are corporations and are incorporated and have their principal place of business in a…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Guaranty Trust Co. v. YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Guaranty Trust Co. v. YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- MacPherson v. . Buick Motor Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1916
- Sartor v. Arkansas Natural Gas Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
- S. J. Groves & Sons Company v. Ohio Turnpike CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1963
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Tocco v. PiersanteMichigan Court of Appeals · 1976
- Lovitt v. Concord School DistrictMichigan Court of Appeals · 1975
- Cole v. RifeMichigan Court of Appeals · 1977
- American States Insurance Co. v. TAUBMAN COMPANY, INC.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 1972
- Drenkhahn v. SmithMichigan Court of Appeals · 1980