Legal Opinion · Dissent

Mazur v. Young

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

Decided November 16, 2007No. 06-1525Published

1DissentShadur, District Judge

With regret, I believe that the majority opinion has mistakenly looked to a generalized legal doctrine as somehow overriding the specific language of the contract between the parties — a near — classic exaltation of form over substance. Because there is of course no contention that the guaranty executed by Roi and Dyan Young (“Youngs”) is somehow contrary to public policy so as to render it unenforceable, I submit that no basis exists for such a failure to hold Youngs to the unambiguous language of their commitment under the guaranty. Hence I respectfully dissent.

Most troubling is that, as…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. H J Tucker & Associates, Inc. v. Allied Chucker & Engineering Co.Michigan Court of Appeals · 1999
  2. Bandit Industries, Inc. v. Hobbs International, Inc.Michigan Supreme Court · 2001
  3. Cordova Chemical Co. v. Department of Natural ResourcesMichigan Court of Appeals · 1995
  4. Diversified Financial Systems, Inc v. SchanhalsMichigan Court of Appeals · 1994
  5. Michigan National Bank v. CoteMichigan Supreme Court · 1996

3 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