Case law

Hooper Hathaway Pc v. Atlas Technologies LLC

Michigan Court of Appeals · Feb 24, 2022

or evidence intended for consideration by the trial court, [the defendants were] clearly protected by the doctrine of witness immunity.”7 Id. … Because the evidence establishes that at least one of the conditions identified in MCL 600.2519(3) existed at the time defendants filed their counterclaim, the trial court did not clearly err by concluding that defendants

Rose v. Rose

289 Mich. App. 45 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Jun 22, 2010

Unlike in Heugel , the evidence here does not suggest that the spousal-support provision qualified as “unconscionable” when the parties negotiated it. … Moreover, the events giving rise to Die Tron’s failure qualify as tragic, but hardly extraordinary.

Ykimoff v. W a Foote Memorial Hospital

285 Mich. App. 80 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Jul 16, 2009

Specifically, when determining whether a witness is qualified as an expert, the trial court should not weigh the proffered witness’s credibility. … Specifically, the comments made on the day following the second surgery are clearly precluded because of the failure to establish temporal proximity with the alleged events.

Riza v. Delray Baking Co.

200 Mich. App. 169 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Jun 8, 1993

The record did not establish that plaintiffs wife was a trained nurse’s aide or was providing the services of a nurse’s aide. … The board found that the testimony established that her activities amounted to more than the mere performance of ordinary household tasks that do not qualify as attendant care.

People of Michigan v. Madison Danielle Perry

Michigan Court of Appeals · Aug 12, 2021

[emphasis added] Clearly, then, when a person is under the influence of marijuana or is consuming marijuana while operating a vehicle, the person is not afforded the same limitation on punishment as one who is under … Therefore, we discern no intent within the MMMA to immunize the visibly impaired driver from prosecution.

Estate of Timesha Beauchamp v. Michael Storms

Michigan Court of Appeals · Jun 27, 2024

A trial court may only grant a motion made under MCR 2.116(C)(8) “when a claim is so clearly unenforceable that no factual development could possibly justify recovery.” … “Under the GTLA, a governmental employee is entitled to governmental immunity and, thus, summary disposition if the plaintiff fails to establish that the employee owed a duty in tort.”

Citizens Insurance Co. of America v. Juno Lighting, Inc.

247 Mich. App. 236 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Oct 31, 2001

examples as contributory negligence, the existence of an agreement to arbitrate, assumption of risk, payment, release, satisfaction, discharge, license, fraud, duress, estoppel, statute of frauds, statute of limitations, immunity … Here, the trial court undertook a reasoned, dispassionate, and lengthy analysis of the parties’ arguments; it did not clearly abuse its discretion. MASB-SEG, supra at 400; Brenner, supra.

Charles Magley III v. M&W Incorporated

325 Mich. App. 307 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Jul 17, 2018

Additionally, plaintiff argues that the tank and sprayer were not subject to repossession because these items do not qualify as “accessions” within the meaning of the Loan and Security Agreement. … Clearly, ¶ 1 envisions a more permanent attachment, comparable to installing something, while ¶ 9 contemplates a more temporary attachment on par with leaving something inside the property.

Berrien County v. Michigan

136 Mich. App. 772 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Aug 20, 1984

Thus, a hospital, without being licensed as a "nursing home”, is clearly contemplated to provide nursing home services as a "nursing care facility”. … Thus, such hospitals are permissive, and once *786 established, the county is given the authority to operate them.

Estate of John Edward Rogers v. McLaren MacOmb

Michigan Court of Appeals · Sep 11, 2025

The alleged acts, omissions, and injuries were wholly unrelated to the pandemic, so deeming defendant immune would contravene the Legislature’s clearly- communicated intent to limit this immunization to services … However, the plaintiff must establish beyond that the actor simply “could have done more,” for “a claim can always be made that extra precautions could have influenced the result.” Id.

Yellow Tail Ventures Inc v. City of Berkley

Michigan Court of Appeals · Dec 15, 2022

The statute could have been drafted to omit this qualifying language, and the provision would have made grammatical sense. … But, the statute was not written that alternative way, and the statute does include the qualifier “within the municipality.”

P Kevin Ong v. Cheryl Lewis

Michigan Court of Appeals · Jun 8, 2023

And this is a pure credibility contest between plaintiff’s highly qualified and unchallenged expert and defendants’ experts. … The majority mistakenly holds Ong to a higher standard by requiring him to establish that Lewis’s conduct constitutes “the” proximate cause of his injuries.

Wayne County Board of Commissioners v. Wayne County Airport Authority

253 Mich. App. 144 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Dec 11, 2002

In Mulloy v Wayne Co Bd of Supervisors, 246 Mich 632, 635 [ 225 NW 615 (1929)], the distinction is pointed out: “ ‘Clearly, because of its provision as to population, the act applies to Wayne county only. … For a local government that operates an airport that becomes a qualified airport after the effective date of this chapter, there is created an authority on the date the airport becomes a qualified airport.

State Highway Commission v. Drouillard

6 Mich. App. 605 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Apr 25, 1967

Various of the property owners have appealed from an order confirming awards as to parcels 2, 54, 73, 84, and 87 in the matter of the acquisition of land for the laying out, establishing, and opening of FAI-75 expressway … This was clearly a departure from the method provided by the 1850 constitution and statutes.

Casco Township v. Secretary of State

261 Mich. App. 386 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Jun 24, 2004

The trial court denied the writ, ruling that the Secretary of State is only required to certify those petitions that are clearly appropriate. … This broad definition indicates that a single election district is established to determine a change of boundary lines affecting multiple cities, villages, or townships.

People v. Sardy

313 Mich. App. 679 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Dec 29, 2015

Of course, testimony given at a preliminary examination qualifies as being testimonial in nature, see id. at 698-699 ; Crawford, 541 US at 68 ; therefore, it was necessary to establish that the victim here was un *693 available … Clearly, at least one of these principles must apply, yet defendant engages in no legal analysis regarding any of the principles.

People v. Willis

60 Mich. App. 154 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Apr 7, 1975

People v Eroh, 47 Mich App 669, 675 ; 209 NW2d 832 (1973). 5 We note that we have found no case in which a minimum standard for fingerprint comparisons has been established. … This testimony clearly served to discredit one of his alternative explanations.

Mulcahy v. Verhines

276 Mich. App. 693 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Nov 27, 2007

The use of another’s property qualifies as adverse if made under a claim of right when no right exists. Id. … The evidence clearly shows that plaintiffs’ and Bartell’s use of defendants’ property was open and notorious and that either plaintiffs or Bartell had used defendants’ property for more than 15 years.

Mark W Dobronski v. Transamerica Life Insurance

Michigan Court of Appeals · May 25, 2023

But, these and other factual matters will need to be established with evidence developed during discovery. E. … First and most critically, there is nothing in the statute that clearly indicates that Congress intended for private lawsuits to enforce caller-ID requirements.

Mead v. Peterson-King Co.

24 Mich. App. 530 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Jul 8, 1970

MOLA §413.15 (Stat Ann 1968 Rev § 17.189) clearly states: “Expenses of recovery shall be the reasonable expenditures, including attorney fees, incurred in effecting such recovery. … Commissioner of Dept. of Labor & Industry (1968), 103 NJ Super 180 ( 246 A2d 759 ), aff’d in part (1969), 106 NJ Super 405 ( 256 A2d 63 ), cert granted, 54 NJ 561 ( 258 A2d 13 ). 8 It is well established that the workmen’