Legal Opinion

Spigno v. Precision Pipeline, LLC

District Court, E.D. Michigan

Decided November 7, 2014No. Case Nos. 14-10076, 14-11440PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTIONS TO AMEND COMPLAINT

DAVID M. LAWSON, District Judge.

The plaintiffs in these consolidated cases each were injured in a common motor vehicle accident involving the defendants. They each filed complaints under Michigan’s no-fault insurance law for third-party damages against the defendants, alleging that defendant Alan Gansch was negligent, and that he was acting as defendant Precision Pipeline’s employee at the time. The plaintiffs’ theory of liability against Precision Pipeline originally was based on the doctrine of respondeat superior. After…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
  2. Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
  3. Foman v. DavisSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
  4. Jones v. City of CincinnatiCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2008
  5. Duggins v. Steak 'N Shake, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1999

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. ZMC Pharmacy, LLC v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 2018
  2. City of Fort Lauderdale General Employees' Retirement System v. Holley Inc.District Court, W.D. Kentucky · 2025
  3. Jevnikar v. SlawinskiDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 2025
  4. Johnson v. Chambers-SmithDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 2023
  5. Jordan v. WilliamsDistrict Court, W.D. Tennessee · 2020

7 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