Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

SADLOWSKI v. MEERON.

ON REHEARING.
(ON REHEARING.)

SHARPE, J.

On defendants' motion a rehearing was granted in this case. It has again been orally argued by counsel.

I have again read the record with care and examined the authorities relied on by counsel. It will serve no useful purpose to restate what was said in the former opinion. I still adhere to the views therein expressed.

The judgment should be affirmed.

FEAD, C.J., and NORTH, McDONALD, and POTTER, JJ., concurred with SHARPE, J.

WIEST, J. (dissenting).

Reargument and reconsideration confirms the views expressed in my opinion reported in 240 Mich. 306.

The judgment should be reversed without a new trial.

FELLOWS and CLARK, JJ., concurred with WIEST, J.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

SADLOWSKI v. MEERON
(Oct 3, 1927)