Ford Motor Co. v. Busam Motor Sales, No. 11100.

CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (6th Circuit)
Writing for the CourtSIMONS, McALLISTER and MILLER, Circuit
Citation185 F.2d 531
PartiesFORD MOTOR CO. v. BUSAM MOTOR SALES, Inc.
Decision Date08 December 1950
Docket NumberNo. 11100.
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
32 practice notes
  • Triangle Min. Co., Inc. v. Stauffer Chemical Co., 84-3516
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (9th Circuit)
    • February 8, 1985
    ...power of termination. For example, in Busam Motor Sales v. Ford Motor Co., 85 F.Supp. 790, 796 (S.D.Ohio 1949), appeal dismissed, 185 F.2d 531 (6th Cir.1950), the court, applying Michigan law, concluded that an automobile manufacturer had to act in Page 740 good faith in terminating an auto......
  • U.S. v. Richardson, 81-2029
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (District of Columbia)
    • March 11, 1983
    ...denial by asserting that the issue may later be raised if plaintiff ultimately prevails. See, e.g., Ford Motor Co. v. Busam Motor Sales, 185 F.2d 531, 534 (6th Cir.1950); Dostal v. Baltimore & Ohio R.R., 170 F.2d 116 (3d...
  • Jones v. Wittenberg University, s. 75-1459
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (6th Circuit)
    • April 22, 1976
    ...U.S.C. § 1292(a). Wagner v. Burlington Industries, Inc., 423 F.2d 1319, 1321 (6th Cir. 1970), Ford Motor Co. v. Busam Motor Sales, Inc., 185 F.2d 531, 533 (6th Cir. 1950). If plaintiff elects to agree to the remittitur, the defendant may appeal from the In this appeal, plaintiff sought to h......
  • Busam Motor Sales v. Ford Motor Co., 11673.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (6th Circuit)
    • April 14, 1953
    ...This Court dismissed the appeal on the ground that it was not an appealable order. Ford Motor Co. v. Busam Motor Sales, Inc., 6 Cir., 185 F.2d 531. The facts in detail can be obtained from those two The original complaint alleges that by contract of March 4, 1946, the appellant was designat......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
32 cases
  • Triangle Min. Co., Inc. v. Stauffer Chemical Co., 84-3516
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (9th Circuit)
    • February 8, 1985
    ...power of termination. For example, in Busam Motor Sales v. Ford Motor Co., 85 F.Supp. 790, 796 (S.D.Ohio 1949), appeal dismissed, 185 F.2d 531 (6th Cir.1950), the court, applying Michigan law, concluded that an automobile manufacturer had to act in Page 740 good faith in terminating an auto......
  • U.S. v. Richardson, 81-2029
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (District of Columbia)
    • March 11, 1983
    ...denial by asserting that the issue may later be raised if plaintiff ultimately prevails. See, e.g., Ford Motor Co. v. Busam Motor Sales, 185 F.2d 531, 534 (6th Cir.1950); Dostal v. Baltimore & Ohio R.R., 170 F.2d 116 (3d...
  • Jones v. Wittenberg University, s. 75-1459
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (6th Circuit)
    • April 22, 1976
    ...U.S.C. § 1292(a). Wagner v. Burlington Industries, Inc., 423 F.2d 1319, 1321 (6th Cir. 1970), Ford Motor Co. v. Busam Motor Sales, Inc., 185 F.2d 531, 533 (6th Cir. 1950). If plaintiff elects to agree to the remittitur, the defendant may appeal from the In this appeal, plaintiff sought to h......
  • Busam Motor Sales v. Ford Motor Co., 11673.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (6th Circuit)
    • April 14, 1953
    ...This Court dismissed the appeal on the ground that it was not an appealable order. Ford Motor Co. v. Busam Motor Sales, Inc., 6 Cir., 185 F.2d 531. The facts in detail can be obtained from those two The original complaint alleges that by contract of March 4, 1946, the appellant was designat......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT