# Walters v. Nadell

> Michigan Supreme Court · June 25, 2008 · 481 Mich. 377

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9503767

## Case

- **Full name:** Walters v. Nadell
- **Court:** Michigan Supreme Court
- **Decided:** June 25, 2008
- **Citations:** 481 Mich. 377; 751 N.W.2d 431
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Weaver
- **Judges:** Weaver, Taylor, Kelly, Cavanagh, Corrigan, Young, Markman
- **Cited by:** 429 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9503767

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- 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
- stating that courts are not “the research assistants of the litigants” and that the parties “have a duty to fully present their legal arguments” for resolution

## Opinion text

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).

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9503767. Public record. Not legal advice.