Legal Opinion

Nash v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.

Michigan Court of Appeals

Decided February 11, 1969No. Docket 1,183PublishedCited by 10 opinions

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

  1. De Forrest v. WrightMichigan Supreme Court · 1852
  2. Adams v. F. W. Woolworth Co.New York Supreme Court · 1932
  3. Simpson v. BurtonMichigan Supreme Court · 1950
  4. Cary v. ThomasMichigan Supreme Court · 1956
  5. Riedel v. Moran, Fitzsimons Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1894

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Noble v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.California Court of Appeal · 1973
  2. Safeway Stores, Inc. v. KellyDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1982
  3. Nash v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1970
  4. Simon v. Safeway, Inc.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2007
  5. Castellanos v. Tommy John, LLCCourt of Appeals of Utah · 2014

5 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