Legal Opinion

Davis v. Beres

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided May 3, 1971No. 5 April Term 1971, Docket No. 52,909PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Per curiam

In 1958, by amendatory Act No 152, the Legislature declared a specific time limitation against the institution of actions provided by our dramshop statute (MCLA §436.22 [Stat Ann 1971 Rev § 18.993]). The limitation read then and reads now:

“Any action shall be instituted within 2 years after the happening of the event.”

On appeal granted (383 Mich 814) to review the decision of Division 2 (Davis v. Beres [1970], 24 Mich App 130), the appellant-defendant avers upon appellee-accepted facts that the instant dramshop action was not instituted or — synonymously—com menced within the time allowed hy…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Platt v. Union Pacific RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1879
  2. Husted v. Consumers Power Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1965
  3. Holland v. EatonMichigan Supreme Court · 1964
  4. Wayne County Board of Road Commissioners v. Wayne County ClerkMichigan Supreme Court · 1940
  5. Peck v. German Fire InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 1894

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Quin Blair Enterprises, Inc. v. Julien Construction Co.Wyoming Supreme Court · 1979
  2. Ardella Patterson v. Chrysler GroupCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2017
  3. Shepard v. KaylerMichigan Court of Appeals · 1985

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API