Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Contacts - Subrogation - Partial Subrogation Of A Cause Of Action For Personal Injuries, Jerome M. Salle
Contacts - Subrogation - Partial Subrogation Of A Cause Of Action For Personal Injuries, Jerome M. Salle
Michigan Law Review
Plaintiff, an incorporated home for the aged, provided all essential medical care to one of its residents under the provisions of a life-care contract between it and the resident. On the basis of a contract clause which purported to subrogate plaintiff to the right of the resident to recover medical expenses caused by the negligence of third parties, plaintiff brought an action to recover certain medical expenses incurred from the party who was allegedly responsible for the injuries and death of the resident. The trial court sustained a demurrer to the complaint for failure to state a cause of action …
Concurrent Causation In Insurance Contracts, William Conant Brewer Jr.
Concurrent Causation In Insurance Contracts, William Conant Brewer Jr.
Michigan Law Review
A great deal of work and thought has been devoted to concurrent causation problems in the field of torts. Less attention has been paid to the insurance cases, and no serious effort has been made to formulate the separate rules applicable to them. It is the thesis of this article that concurrent causation problems which arise under an insurance contract must be handled somewhat differently from those which arise in connection with tort litigation, and that the tendency to borrow rules of law from the larger tort field and apply them to the smaller volume of insurance cases can only …
Sales - Implied Warranty - Privity Of Contract As A Prerequisite To Recovery From Manufacturer, John L. Peschel S. Ed.
Sales - Implied Warranty - Privity Of Contract As A Prerequisite To Recovery From Manufacturer, John L. Peschel S. Ed.
Michigan Law Review
Plaintiff sustained injuries in the course of his employment when a defective abrasive wheel, while being used in its intended manner, exploded in his face. The abrasive wheel was purchased by plaintiff's employer directly from the manufacturer. Plaintiff sought recovery from the manufacturer on two grounds: negligence in the manufacture of the abrasive wheel and breach of implied warranty for fitness of purpose. The negligence issue was submitted to the jury, which returned a verdict adverse to the plaintiff. The manufacturer's demurrer to the cause of action based upon implied warranty was sustained by the trial court. On appeal from …