Legal Opinion

International Union United Automobile Workers v. Wood

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided June 8, 1953No. Docket 46; Calendar 45,586PublishedCited by 38 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*11Bushnbll, J.

Plaintiff Union’s appeal is from 2 orders denying its motions to add Willard Kime, Jack Ely and Oscar Getz as parties defendant.

On October 25, 1950, defendant Phil Wood, doing business as the Bangor Advance, published in his newspaper a full-page advertisement which contained the statement: “This ad paid for by the Bangor Citizens’ Committee,” The Union deemed this advertisement to be libelous. The text of the advertisement does not appear in the record, and the matter of whether it was libelous is not before us. On April 13, 1951, plaintiff began an action against Wood for…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. De Haan v. WinterMichigan Supreme Court · 1932
  2. Stetson v. FrenchMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1947
  3. Owen v. KingTexas Supreme Court · 1938
  4. McNaughton v. Rockford State BankMichigan Supreme Court · 1933
  5. Dowse v. GaynorMichigan Supreme Court · 1908

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

3Cited by38 opinions

  1. Chicago Park District v. Kenroy, Inc.Illinois Supreme Court · 1980
  2. William E. Bufalino v. The Michigan Bell Telephone CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1969
  3. Roland Riddell v. Riddell Washington CorporationCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1989
  4. Lumber Village, Inc v. SieglerMichigan Court of Appeals · 1984
  5. Harold Echols v. Chrysler CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1980

33 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