Keith a Hubbard v. National Railroad Passenger Corp

CourtMichigan Supreme Court
DecidedNovember 3, 2005
Docket127240
StatusPublished

This text of Keith a Hubbard v. National Railroad Passenger Corp (Keith a Hubbard v. National Railroad Passenger Corp) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Michigan Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Keith a Hubbard v. National Railroad Passenger Corp, (Mich. 2005).

Opinion

Order Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

November 3, 2005 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice

127240 Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan KEITH A. HUBBARD, Robert P. Young, Jr. Plaintiff-Appellee, Stephen J. Markman, Justices

v SC: 127240

COA: 246165

Wayne CC: 01-115388-NO

NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION a/k/a AMTRAK,

Defendant-Appellant,

and SAUK TRAIL DEVELOPMENT, INC., a/k/a

SAUK TRAIL HILLS DEVELOPMENT,

ALLIED WASTE SYSTEMS, INC., a/k/a

ALLIED WASTE INDUSTRIES, INC., and

AUTO CLUB INSURANCE ASSOCIATION

d/b/a AUTO CLUB INSURANCE COMPANY,

and AUTO CLUB OF MICHIGAN

INSURANCE GROUP,

Defendants.

_________________________________________/

On October 19, 2005, the Court heard oral argument on the application for leave to appeal the September 7, 2004 judgment of the Court of Appeals. On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal is again considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.302(G)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we REVERSE that part of the Court of Appeals judgment that reverses the Wayne Circuit Court’s grant of defendant’s motion for summary disposition on plaintiff’s Federal Employers’ Liability Act claim, for the reasons stated by dissenting Court of Appeals Judge Zahra. We REINSTATE the order of the Wayne Circuit Court granting defendant’s motion for summary disposition.

CAVANAGH and KELLY, JJ., would deny leave to appeal.

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. November 3, 2005 _________________________________________ t1031 Clerk

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Keith a Hubbard v. National Railroad Passenger Corp, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/keith-a-hubbard-v-national-railroad-passenger-corp-mich-2005.