Legal Opinion
Brooks v. Rose
Michigan Court of Appeals
Decided October 21, 1991No. Docket 115963, 116745PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Per curiam
Following a bench trial, defendants, David Rose and Sydney Rose, were awarded $13,998.73 on their countercomplaint against plaintiffs, Marvin Brooks and Sanford Layne. Defendants appeal as of right, claiming they were entitled to additional damages. Plaintiffs cross appeal, claiming that defendants were improperly awarded attorney fees as an element of damages. We affirm in part and reverse in part.
i
In June 1983, David Rose met with Sanford Layne regarding the proposed development of a shopping center and office building complex on property in Kentwood, Michigan. Rose presented Layne with…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. AllenMichigan Court of Appeals · 1973
- Oppenhuizen v. WennerstenMichigan Court of Appeals · 1966
- McCullagh v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1955
- Scott v. Hurd-Corrigan Moving & Storage Co, IncMichigan Court of Appeals · 1981
- Bates v. KitchelMichigan Supreme Court · 1911
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Ypsilanti Charter Township v. KircherMichigan Court of Appeals · 2008
- Burnside v. State Farm Fire and Casualty Co.Michigan Court of Appeals · 1995
- Teodorescu v. Bushnell, Gage, Reizen & ByingtonMichigan Court of Appeals · 1993
- McCarty v. Auto Club InsuranceMichigan Court of Appeals · 1994
- In Re MartinMichigan Court of Appeals · 1993
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.