Legal Opinion

Schlinkert v. Henderson

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided September 5, 1951No. Docket 1, Calendar 45,047PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtReid, C. J.

This is an action for libel. Prom an order of the trial court dismissing the action on motion, the plaintiff appeals.

■Well-pleaded allegations of the declaration must be taken as true.

Plaintiff’s action is founded on a letter written by defendant, who at the time was a member of the Michigan State liquor control commission, to the Michigan State civil service commission, having-reference to plaintiff, who at that time was an employee of the Michigan State liquor control commission. The letter was addressed to the civil service commission, attention: Mr. Arthur Rasch, director, and is recited…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Murray v. BrancatoNew York Court of Appeals · 1943
  2. Trebilcock v. AndersonMichigan Supreme Court · 1898
  3. Kunzig v. Liquor Control CommissionMichigan Supreme Court · 1950

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Montgomery v. PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1958
  2. McNayr v. KellySupreme Court of Florida · 1966
  3. Tocco v. PiersanteMichigan Court of Appeals · 1976
  4. Couch v. SchultzMichigan Court of Appeals · 1992
  5. Parks v. JohnsonMichigan Court of Appeals · 1978

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