Almar Trucking, Inc. v. Bonanza Trucking Co.
Michigan Court of Appeals
1DissentT. G. Kavanagh, P. J.
I do not favor the application of Justice Cardozo’s opinion in Standard Chemicals & Metals Corp. v. Waugh Chemical Corp. (1921), 231 NY 51 (131 NE 566, 14 ALR 1054), to the case at bar. The reason for the “void for vagueness” rule “is certainly not as obvious in a civil responsibility as it would be in a criminal charge.” Hall v. Union Light, Heat & Power Co. (1944, ED Ky), 53 F Supp 817, 820. There is a vast difference between a person, on the one hand, answering an indictment which charges that he is guilty of committing a criminal act, subjecting him to the penal consequences thereof, and,…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Kukla v. PerryMichigan Supreme Court · 1960
- Grand Rapids Motor Coach Co. v. Public Service CommissionMichigan Supreme Court · 1949
- Standard Chemicals & Metals' Corp. v. Waugh Chemical Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1921
- Leland v. FordMichigan Supreme Court · 1929
- Hall v. Union Light, Heat & Power Co.District Court, E.D. Kentucky · 1944
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.