Sun Oil Company v. Rosborough

5 Citing cases

  1. Jeminson v. Montgomery Real Estate & Co.

    47 Mich. App. 731 (Mich. Ct. App. 1973)   Cited 4 times

    The appellate courts of this state have repeatedly warned against the improper use of summary proceedings to preclude a party from his day in court. Durant v Stahlin, 374 Mich. 82 (1964); Sun Oil Co v Rosborough, 6 Mich. App. 176 (1967). I would reverse and remand for further proceedings.

  2. Brown v. Pointer

    41 Mich. App. 539 (Mich. Ct. App. 1972)   Cited 11 times

    This Court has repeatedly adhered to the proposition that the purpose of summary judgment is not to force the parties to try a case by affidavit — that one has a right to trial where there is a disputed issue of fact. Sun Oil Co v. Rosborough, 6 Mich. App. 176, 179 (1967). Consequently, whenever a presented issue of material fact turns upon the credibility of a witness or affiant, thereby making credibility a crucial factor, summary judgment should not be granted.

  3. Hamilton v. City of Charlevoix

    198 N.W.2d 898 (Mich. Ct. App. 1972)

    Thus, a summary judgment should not have been granted. Weeren v. Evening News Association, 379 Mich. 475 (1967), Sun Oil Company v. Rosborough, 6 Mich. App. 176 (1967). The record in this case reveals that both parties have indulged in tactics designed for the purposes of harassment and delay.

  4. Waterview Assoc. v. Lawyers Title

    30 Mich. App. 687 (Mich. Ct. App. 1971)   Cited 11 times
    Referring to the insurer's assertion of a policy exclusion as an affirmative defense

    "A summary judgment is improper when the pleadings and opposing affidavits reveal a genuine issue of material fact. Tripp v. Dziwanoski (1965), 375 Mich. 619; Sun Oil Company v. Rosborough (1967), 6 Mich. App. 176. The summary judgment issued by the trial court is vacated and the case remanded for trial.

  5. Motor State Ins. Co. v. Leonard

    183 N.W.2d 309 (Mich. Ct. App. 1970)   Cited 1 times

    (1967), 379 Mich. 280; Strom-Johnson Construction Co. v. Riverview Furniture Store (1924), 227 Mich. 55. A summary judgment is improper when the pleadings and opposing affidavits reveal a genuine issue of material fact. Tripp v. Dziwanoski (1965), 375 Mich. 619; Sun Oil Company v. Rosborough (1967), 6 Mich. App. 176. The summary judgment issued by the trial court is vacated and the case remanded for trial.