Legal Opinion

Gerkin v. Brown & Sehler Co.

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided September 30, 1913No. Docket No. 85PublishedCited by 51 opinions

Error to Livingston; Miner, J. Case by Henry C. Gerkin against the Brown & Sehler Company for personal injuries. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error.

1Opinion of the CourtSteere, C. J.

This was an action of tort, wherein plaintiff recovered, in the circuit court of Livingston county, a judgment against defendant in the sum of $500, as compensation for injuries resulting to plaintiff from wearing a fur-lined coat with a dyed, or blended, collar, which, it is claimed, poisoned his neck, face, and hands, causing him great suffering, and seriously injured his health.

Plaintiff bought the coat, which had on it a dyed muskrat fur collar, on December 13,1910, from Young Bros., a firm of local retail dealers in Howell, Mich., where he resided. They bought it about a month previous,…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Tomlinson v. Armour & Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1908
  2. Thornton v. DowWashington Supreme Court · 1910
  3. Gould v. Slater Woolen Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1888
  4. Lester v. ThompsonMichigan Supreme Court · 1892
  5. Berry v. Harbor Springs Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1912

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

3Cited by51 opinions

  1. McEwen v. Ortho Pharmaceutical CorporationOregon Supreme Court · 1974
  2. Comstock v. General Motors Corp.Michigan Supreme Court · 1959
  3. Wooderson v. Ortho Pharmaceutical Corp.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1984
  4. Antcliff v. State Employees Credit UnionMichigan Supreme Court · 1982
  5. Gregory v. Cincinnati Inc.Michigan Supreme Court · 1995

46 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