Kimber v. Eding
Michigan Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtFead, J.
Plaintiff had verdict against both defendants for injuries caused by negligent operation of an automobile by Brower. On motion, judgment non obstante was entered for Eding.
Eding conducts a Ford sales agency at Hamilton. Harry Yredeveld, a mail carrier, had an agreement with Eding by which, upon payment of $100 and purchasing a tire, he traded his car for a new one about every six months. December 4th, Yredeveld took his car to Eding’s garage, left it, and received a new car in exchange. Eding was not present when he came in. Someone about the garage procured the license plates for the new car…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Endres v. Mara-Rickenbacker Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1928
- Schomberg v. BaylyMichigan Supreme Court · 1932
- Scarborough v. Detroit Operating Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1931
- Ittleson v. HaganMichigan Supreme Court · 1928
- Kruse v. CareyMichigan Supreme Court · 1932
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Fleckenstein v. Citizens' Mutual Automobile InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 1950
- Bayer v. Jackson City Bank & Trust Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1952
- Tanis v. EdingMichigan Supreme Court · 1933
- Taylor v. BurdickMichigan Supreme Court · 1948
- Tanis v. EdingMichigan Supreme Court · 1936
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.