Case Law Gilliam v. Hi-Temp Products Inc.

Gilliam v. Hi-Temp Products Inc.

Document Cited Authorities (38) Cited in (46) Related

Goldberg, Persky, Jennings & White, P.C. (by James J. Bedortha and Lane A. Clack), Saginaw, for the appellees.

Plunkett & Cooney, P.C. (by Jeffrey C. Gerish), Bloomfield Hills, for the appellant.

Before: WHITBECK, C.J., and MARK J. CAVANAGH and MARKEY, JJ.

MARKEY, J.

In each of these consolidated appeals, defendant Hi-Temp Products, Inc., appeals by leave granted the trial court's order denying its motion for summary disposition. Hi-Temp argues that plaintiffs' claims of asbestos-related personal injury are barred by MCL 450.1842a1 because they were filed beyond the one-year period allowed for the filing of claims after Hi-Temp published notice of its dissolution. We agree and reverse.

I. Summary of Facts and Proceedings

Hi-Temp sold asbestos products. Many individuals have claimed that their exposure to Hi-Temp's products caused asbestos-related diseases. They have sued Hi-Temp frequently and continuously since the mid-1980s. In 1992, Hi-Temp ceased active business operations. Its sole shareholder resolved on October 8, 1993, that Hi-Temp be dissolved and its assets distributed. On October 14, 1993, Hi-Temp filed a certificate of dissolution pursuant to subsection 831(b). The Bureau of Corporations and Securities stamped the certificate filed on October 25, 1993, thereby making the dissolution effective. Subsection 131(3); subsection 804(7); Freeman v. Hi Temp Products, Inc., 229 Mich.App. 92, 580 N.W.2d 918 (1998). Hi-Temp averred that it made a "complete distribution of its corporate assets" by selling its inventory and equipment, collecting its receivables, paying bills, and making provisions for the payment of its outstanding liabilities. It is undisputed that Hi-Temp made a final distribution of assets in the amount of $9,571.99. But it is also undisputed that from 1978 through 1985 Citizens Insurance Company provided Hi-Temp with products-liability insurance coverage, and that the...

5 cases
Document | Michigan Supreme Court – 2013
Petipren v. Jaskowski
"...policy choices than those selected by the Legislature....”) (quotation marks and citation omitted); Gilliam v. Hi–Temp Prod., Inc., 260 Mich.App. 98, 109, 677 N.W.2d 856 (2003) (“The fact that a statute appears to be impolitic, unwise, or unfair is not sufficient to permit judicial construc..."
Document | Michigan Supreme Court – 2004
Monat v. State Farm Ins. Co.
"... ... Meijer, Inc., 431 Mich. 368, 373 n. 3, 429 N.W.2d 169 (1988) ... "[M]utuality of ... "
Document | Court of Appeal of Michigan – 2015
Doe v. Dep't of Corr.
"...wisdom of a statute is for the determination of the Legislature and the law must be enforced as written." Gilliam v. Hi–Temp Prod. Inc., 260 Mich.App. 98, 109, 677 N.W.2d 856 (2003). "The fact that a statute appears to be impolitic, unwise, or unfair is not sufficient to permit judicial con..."
Document | Mississippi Supreme Court – 2015
Williams v. Clark Sand Co.
"...673, 592 S.E.2d 175, 177 (2003) ; Theta Props. v. Ronci Realty Co., 814 A.2d 907, 910, 912 (R.I.2003) ; Gilliam v. Hi–Temp Prods. Inc., 260 Mich.App. 98, 112, 677 N.W.2d 856, 867 (2003) ; State ex rel. Nat. Super Markets, Inc. v. Sweeney, 949 S.W.2d 289, 292 (Mo.Ct.App.1997) ; Keefe v. Glas..."
Document | Ohio Supreme Court – 2012
In re All Cases Against Sager Corp.
"...been barred as a matter of law, no legal right existed for appointment of a receiver. {¶ 36} Likewise, in Gilliam v. Hi–Temp Prods. Inc., 260 Mich.App. 98, 118, 677 N.W.2d 856 (2003), the Michigan Court of Appeals explained: [Insurance policies'] only value is the protection they provided f..."

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial

Experience vLex's unparalleled legal AI

Access millions of documents and let Vincent AI power your research, drafting, and document analysis — all in one platform.

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
5 cases
Document | Michigan Supreme Court – 2013
Petipren v. Jaskowski
"...policy choices than those selected by the Legislature....”) (quotation marks and citation omitted); Gilliam v. Hi–Temp Prod., Inc., 260 Mich.App. 98, 109, 677 N.W.2d 856 (2003) (“The fact that a statute appears to be impolitic, unwise, or unfair is not sufficient to permit judicial construc..."
Document | Michigan Supreme Court – 2004
Monat v. State Farm Ins. Co.
"... ... Meijer, Inc., 431 Mich. 368, 373 n. 3, 429 N.W.2d 169 (1988) ... "[M]utuality of ... "
Document | Court of Appeal of Michigan – 2015
Doe v. Dep't of Corr.
"...wisdom of a statute is for the determination of the Legislature and the law must be enforced as written." Gilliam v. Hi–Temp Prod. Inc., 260 Mich.App. 98, 109, 677 N.W.2d 856 (2003). "The fact that a statute appears to be impolitic, unwise, or unfair is not sufficient to permit judicial con..."
Document | Mississippi Supreme Court – 2015
Williams v. Clark Sand Co.
"...673, 592 S.E.2d 175, 177 (2003) ; Theta Props. v. Ronci Realty Co., 814 A.2d 907, 910, 912 (R.I.2003) ; Gilliam v. Hi–Temp Prods. Inc., 260 Mich.App. 98, 112, 677 N.W.2d 856, 867 (2003) ; State ex rel. Nat. Super Markets, Inc. v. Sweeney, 949 S.W.2d 289, 292 (Mo.Ct.App.1997) ; Keefe v. Glas..."
Document | Ohio Supreme Court – 2012
In re All Cases Against Sager Corp.
"...been barred as a matter of law, no legal right existed for appointment of a receiver. {¶ 36} Likewise, in Gilliam v. Hi–Temp Prods. Inc., 260 Mich.App. 98, 118, 677 N.W.2d 856 (2003), the Michigan Court of Appeals explained: [Insurance policies'] only value is the protection they provided f..."

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex