explaining that “courts are not the research assistants of the litigants; the parties have a duty to fully present their legal arguments to the court for its resolution of their dispute”
How later courts described this case
- explaining that “courts are not the research assistants of the litigants; the parties have a duty to fully present their legal arguments to the court for its resolution of their dispute”
- explaining that “a litigant must preserve an issue for appellate review by raising it in the trial court” and that the failure to do so generally review of that issue on appeal
- recognizing that Michigan follows the “raise or waive” rule of appellate review, where a party’s failure to timely raise an issue waives review of that issue on appeal
- stating that Michigan generally follows the “raise or waive” rule, which precludes review of an issue in a civil case unless it is preserved for appellate review
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
WEAVER, J.
(concurring). I concur in the result of the majority opinion affirming the refusal of the Court of Appeals to address plaintiffs argument concerning the tolling provision of the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act, 1 because the plaintiff waived that argument at the trial court level.
50 USC Appendix 526(a).