Legal Opinion

Anzaldua v. Neogen Corp.

Michigan Court of Appeals

Decided May 17, 2011No. Docket No. 296978PublishedCited by 56 opinions

1Per curiam

Plaintiff appeals as of right the trial court’s order granting defendant’s motion for summary disposition under MCR 2.116(C)(7) (statute of limitations), (C)(8) (failure to state a claim), and (C)(10) (no genuine issue of material fact). Defendant cross-appeals, arguing that the trial court made an improper finding of fact when deciding its motion. We affirm.

I. FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS

This action arose from defendant’s termination of plaintiffs employment in June 2007. In May and June 2007, defendant was in the process of establishing a laboratory for the manufacture of an equine botulism…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Skinner v. Square D Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1994
  2. Booth Newspapers, Inc v. University of Michigan Board of RegentsMichigan Supreme Court · 1993
  3. Halloran v. BhanMichigan Supreme Court · 2004
  4. Popma v. Auto Club Ins. Ass'n.Michigan Supreme Court · 1994
  5. Adams v. AdamsMichigan Court of Appeals · 2007

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

3Cited by56 opinions

  1. McNEILL-MARKS v. MIDMICHIGAN MEDICAL CENTER-GRATIOTMichigan Court of Appeals · 2016
  2. Pace v. Edel-HarrelsonMichigan Supreme Court · 2016
  3. Barrow v. City of Detroit Election CommissionMichigan Court of Appeals · 2014
  4. Redd v. Carney (In re Redd)Michigan Court of Appeals · 2017
  5. Michigan Head & Spine Institute, PC v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceMichigan Court of Appeals · 2013

51 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