Nash v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.
Michigan Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the CourtLesinski, C. J.
Defendant Sears, Roebuck & Company appeals from a judgment totaling $17,250 on a verdict entered below for plaintiffs, Mary Lee Nash and Dan Nash. Sears seeks a reversal and remand for new trial, or, in the alternative, a setting aside of the judgment of “no cause” against it on its cross-claim against codefendant Heidt’s Protective Service, Inc., for entry of judgment against the latter, or a new trial on its cross-claim. The relief sought by defendant Heidt’s Protective Service, Inc., is a reversal of the judgment below in favor of the *558plaintiff and an affirmance of the judgment of “no…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- De Forrest v. WrightMichigan Supreme Court · 1852
- Adams v. F. W. Woolworth Co.New York Supreme Court · 1932
- Simpson v. BurtonMichigan Supreme Court · 1950
- Cary v. ThomasMichigan Supreme Court · 1956
- Riedel v. Moran, Fitzsimons Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1894
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Noble v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.California Court of Appeal · 1973
- Safeway Stores, Inc. v. KellyDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1982
- Nash v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1970
- Simon v. Safeway, Inc.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2007
- Castellanos v. Tommy John, LLCCourt of Appeals of Utah · 2014
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.