Case law

Estate of Marguerite Schubert v. Department of Treasury

322 Mich. App. 439 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Dec 21, 2017

(b) The owner has not established a new principal residence. … Because the definition of “principal residence” clearly provides that a person can only have one place that he or she holds out as his or her “true, fixed, and permanent home to which, whenever absent, he or she intends to

People v. Atkins

96 Mich. App. 672 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Apr 16, 1980

The recordings were also held to be nonadmissible since the search warrant was too general and the reliability of the informant was not established. … The trial court clearly ruled that the latter predominated and consequently held against admission of the evidence.

Aho v. Department of Corrections

263 Mich. App. 281 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Oct 13, 2004

Clearly, in 1997, plaintiff did not indicate in any manner that his assignments to segregation were retaliatory. … The fact that plaintiff engaged in a protected activity under the PWDCRA does not immunize him from an otherwise legitimate or unrelated adverse employment action. Cf.

People v. Kanaan

278 Mich. App. 594 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Apr 17, 2008

The main point relevant to this panel that emanates from 42 USC 1396h is that Congress clearly contemplated state prosecutions under applicable state law. … Again, Congress clearly contemplated prosecutions for Medicaid fraud under applicable state law.

Estate of Clark

33 Mich. App. 395 · Michigan Court of Appeals · May 18, 1971

Trial testimony clearly establishes that 20% of the architect's fee was specifically allocated for the supervision of the project. … Precedent for this rule is established in Husted v.

Jemaa v. MacGregor Athletic Products

151 Mich. App. 273 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Mar 13, 1986

Different proofs and unrelated witnesses will be required to establish each claim, and the possibility of duplicate litigation is slight. … Certainly, the court did refer to and consider statements about the weakness of plaintiffs claim; however, it clearly appears that the court used the statements to support its belief that plaintiff had included Dr.

Janet Lashar Eppel v. Christopher James Eppel

Michigan Court of Appeals · Jan 9, 2018

Any such error must be readily apparent on the face of the award without second-guessing the arbitrator’s thought processes, and the arbitrator’s findings of fact are immune to review altogether. … Clearly, attorney fees were placed before the arbitrator. Equally clearly, at least based on the available record, attorney fees based on need were not, or at least they were not specifically argued.

in Re Jajuga Estate

312 Mich. App. 706 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Oct 20, 2015

Similarly, “entitle” has been defined as “[t]o grant a legal right to or qualify for.” Black’s Law Dictionary (10th ed). … infer that a surviving spouse has a vested right to exempt property that cannot be waived without the consent of the spouse, while a non- 10 As discussed infra, we perceive no indication in the statutory text that a qualifying

Janet Lashar Eppel v. Christopher James Eppel

Michigan Court of Appeals · Jan 9, 2018

Any such error must be readily apparent on the face of the award without second-guessing the arbitrator’s thought processes, and the arbitrator’s findings of fact are immune to review altogether. … Clearly, attorney fees were placed before the arbitrator. Equally clearly, at least based on the available record, attorney fees based on need were not, or at least they were not specifically argued.

Phardel v. State

120 Mich. App. 806 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Nov 2, 1982

Moreover, other evidence in the plaintiffs case tended to establish the requisite connection and was sufficient for the trier of fact to find proximate cause. … A trial judge’s findings of fact in a bench trial will not be set aside unless clearly erroneous. GCR 1963, 517.1.

People v. Strickland

78 Mich. App. 40 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Sep 6, 1977

The prosecutor clearly stated his intention to proceed with the Martinez case even if the defendant pled guilty in the Scott’s case. … At that time, the prosecutor clearly stated that the bargain was no longer available.

Auto Club Ins. Ass'n v. Methner

127 Mich. App. 683 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Aug 1, 1983

requirement of the hit-and-run vehicle (uninsured motorist) coverage was against public policy: "It is interesting to note that the Michigan Legislature, contrary to the public policy argument made by defendants, later saw fit to qualify … See also Basilla v Aetna Ins Corp, 38 Mich App 260 ; 195 NW2d 893 (1972), lv den 387 Mich 774 (1972), where the Court observed that the Legislature’s 1968 amendment of MCL 257.1112; MSA 9.2812 "clearly establishes that such

In the Matter of Griffin

88 Mich. App. 184 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Jan 17, 1979

The commitment, therefore, was a qualified and restricted commitment to the Michigan Department of Social Services. * * *. … Particularly relevant to the instant dispute are the juvenile code, MCL 712A.1 et seq.; MSA 27.3178(598.1) et seq. and the act establishing the Michigan Children’s Institute, MCL 400.201 et seq.; MSA 25.381 et seq.

Engwis v. Michigan Mutual Insurance

181 Mich. App. 16 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Nov 6, 1989

Mere occupancy or presence in the parked vehicle is insufficient to qualify a claimant for no-fault benefits under subsection 3106(1)(c). … Deposition testimony clearly established that decedent regularly used the van for camping and fishing trips and frequently slept in the vehicle.

In Re Nbj

Michigan Court of Appeals · Mar 25, 2025

Accordingly, the evidence clearly and convincingly supported a finding that respondent continued to qualify as a person requiring mental health treatment under MCL 330.1401(1)(a). … Therefore, the evidence clearly and convincingly supported a finding that respondent continued to qualify as a person requiring mental health treatment under MCL 330.1401(1)(b).

Neal v. James

252 Mich. App. 12 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Sep 24, 2002

“First, the court must be satisfied that the named plaintiffs’ counsel is qualified to sufficiently pursue the putative class action. … In sum, the trial court clearly erred in certifying this matter as a class action.

Piper v. Tensor Corp.

71 Mich. App. 658 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Oct 19, 1976

Defendant’s outside expert, thoroughly qualified in the halls of academia, came into the case over three years after the fire and never did test the charred remains of the lamp in the way he wanted. … established that the Tensor Lamp could not have been the instrument which caused the fire in question.”

Glenwood Shopping Center Ltd. Partnership v. K Mart Corp.

136 Mich. App. 90 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Jul 9, 1984

Would K mart be allowed to establish and own its own transformer under MPSC Standard Rules and Regulations? "3. Would Kmart be allowed to establish its own transformer at the shopping center by Consumers Power? "4. … Would Kmart be allowed to establish its own transformer at the shopping center by Glenwood? "5.

Peck v. General Motors Corp.

164 Mich. App. 580 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Dec 7, 1987

The evidence further established that plaintiff was a skilled tradesman, i.e., a toolmaker. Mr. … One exception, obviously, is when the new legislation clearly indicates an intention to be given retroactive effect. That is not the case with § 373.

People v. Murray

234 Mich. App. 46 · Michigan Court of Appeals · May 5, 1999

In other words, the pieces of the drug profile by themselves should not be used to establish the link between innocuous evidence and guilt. United States v Williams, supra at 1241. … Rather, it was clearly meant to educate the jury generally.