Williams v. Litton Systems, Inc.
Michigan Supreme Court
1ConcurrenceRiley, C.J.
I write separately because, while I am in accord with the result reached by the majority, I do not believe that it adequately addresses the certified conflict that it is meant to resolve.1_
*762My concern is that it is difficult to extract a workable rule from the opinion. I gather that the rule is that if the primary complaint alleges active negligence, then the third-party plaintiff is precluded from indemnity because it (third-party plaintiff) is not free from active negligence. I disagree with this rule — if, in fact, this is what the opinion means to say.
The workers’ compensation statute…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Hill v. Sullivan Equipment Co.Michigan Court of Appeals · 1978
- Reed v. ST CLAIR RUBBER CO.Michigan Court of Appeals · 1982
- Cutter v. Massey-Ferguson, IncMichigan Court of Appeals · 1982
- Williams v. Litton Systems, IncMichigan Court of Appeals · 1987
- Home Insurance v. Jones & LamsonMichigan Court of Appeals · 1985
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.