Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Valeo Switches & Detection Systems, Inc. v. EMCom, Inc.

Michigan Court of Appeals

Decided September 26, 2006No. Docket No. 264618Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partFort Hood, J.

MCR 2.116(C)(6) provides for summary disposition of a case when “[ajnother action has been initiated between the same parties involving the same claim.” This court rule is a codification of the former plea of abatement by prior action. Chapple v Nat’l Hardwood Co, 234 Mich 296, 297; 207 NW 888 (1926). A plea in abatement is an objection to the jurisdiction of a court of general jurisdiction. Nat’l Fraternity v Wayne Circuit Judge, 127 Mich 186, 188; 86 NW 540 (1901). To utilize the plea in abatement, one must demonstrate another forum where the rights of the parties have become subject to…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. ISB Sales Co. v. Dave's CakesMichigan Court of Appeals · 2003
  2. Chapple v. National Hardwood Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1926
  3. In Re Elliott's EstateMichigan Supreme Court · 1938
  4. Komendera v. American Bar & Cabinet ManufacturersMichigan Supreme Court · 1973
  5. Owen v. OwenMichigan Supreme Court · 1973

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