Case law

Rouch v. Enquirer & News of Battle Creek

184 Mich. App. 19 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Jun 4, 1990

In addition, the award quite clearly did not shock his judicial conscience. … The Supreme Court opinion in Rouch clearly required this result. 427 Mich 164 -173.

William's Delight Corp. v. Harris

87 Mich. App. 202 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Nov 27, 1978

The subscriptions at issue here clearly fell within the provisions of the narrower exemption and should be governed by it. … Plaintiffs failure either to qualify for the exemption or register constituted a violation of the act.

Trevor Rhoda v. Peter E O'Dovero Inc

Michigan Court of Appeals · Mar 24, 2016

This language clearly and unambiguously provides that snowboarders must bear some, but not all, risks involved in the sport. … For these reasons alone, the rail does not qualify as one of the “unnatural hazards” which create risks that a snowboarder must assume.

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.

Kunde v. Teesdale Lumber Co.

55 Mich. App. 546 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Mar 28, 1974

When it is found that the established normal work week for the employee’s classification of employment in the establishment of the employer where the employee suffered a personal injury is less than 40 hours, then the average … In Hutsko v Chrysler Corp, 381 Mich 99, 102-103 ; 158 NW2d 874, 876 (1968), the Supreme Court in dicta clearly outlined what proofs were needed to show a specific loss of a body member for compensation purposes: *553 "However

Mullins v. Wayne County

16 Mich. App. 365 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Apr 22, 1969

It is a well-established principle that repeals by implication are not favored. … Except as otherwise provided herein, this act shall not be construed as modifying or restricting the immunity of the State from tort liability as it existed heretofore, which immunity is hereby affirmed."

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.

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.

Great Lakes Society v. Georgetown Charter Township

281 Mich. App. 396 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Oct 30, 2008

With respect to whether the other activities are reasonably closely related in substance to the public worship function of the proposed building, almost all of them clearly are. … Failing that, if the alternative property more closely complies with the ordinance requirement, it could qualify for a variance.

People v. Crawford

232 Mich. App. 608 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Feb 16, 1999

Defense counsel clearly erred in stipulating that the 180-day period began on the date of defendant’s arraignment, October 4, 1995, instead of the date he was charged, August 11, 1995. … Because defendant qualified as a fourth-offense habitual offender, the trial court had broad discretion to sentence him to any period of incarceration up to life. MCL 769.12(l)(a); MSA 28.1084(l)(a).

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

Estate of Christopher Groulx v. Danny Frederick Bard Jr

Michigan Court of Appeals · Apr 23, 2015

Because the partial immunity from tort liability established by MCL 500.3135(3) applies only to a motor vehicle with respect to which the security required by MCL 500.3101 is in effect, and because the feller buncher was … not covered by a no-fault policy, defendants were not entitled to the partial immunity established by MCL 500.3135(3).

People of Michigan v. Walter Joseph Caswell

Michigan Court of Appeals · Nov 24, 2025

The issue is whether it qualifies as a treaty tribe.” Id. … Accordingly, the district court’s finding was not clearly erroneous nor an abuse of discretion.

Oakland-Macomb Interceptor Drain Drainage District v. Ric-Man Construction, Inc.

304 Mich. App. 46 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Jan 30, 2014

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY Plaintiff is a special-purpose public corporation established under the Drain Code, MCL 280.1 et seq. … , which he clearly is not.

In Re Adrianson

105 Mich. App. 300 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Apr 9, 1981

insufficient to establish that termination of parental rights was warranted. … The allegations in the petition establish that the medical care of the children was inadequate.

Dept of Talent & Economic Development v. Nbc Truck Equip

Michigan Court of Appeals · Sep 12, 2019

Accordingly, using the claimants’ preferred construction, no client employer that had reported fewer than eight quarters of no payroll or employees by that time could ever meet the criteria, notwithstanding that the Legislature clearly … for the new-employer tax rate even though the entity would not otherwise have qualified under MCL 421.19(a)(1)(i).

Yvonne Beach v. Jade Sanders

Michigan Court of Appeals · Oct 21, 2014

from suit on governmental immunity grounds. … As the Court explained in McCahan, “[W]hen the Legislature specifically qualifies the ability to bring a claim against the state or its subdivisions on a plaintiff’s meeting certain requirements that the plaintiff fails to

People v. Wess

235 Mich. App. 241 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Jul 27, 1999

Given modem procedural safeguards for criminal defendants, the “right” only preserves the possibility that harm will come to the arresting officer or the defendant. 2 Like the court in Treece , we would qualify our decision … We are not deciding the question whether one may intervene where a police officer is using clearly excessive force. 3 “[A] third person does not have the right to intervene, and assist the person the officer is endeavoring

Robert Davis v. Secretary of State

Michigan Court of Appeals · Sep 16, 2020

We do acknowledge, of course, that “[a] necessary corollary to the plain meaning rule is that courts should give the ordinary and accepted meaning to . . . the permissive word ‘may’ unless to do so would clearly frustrate … The Secretary’s actions were entirely consistent with those rights as established by the electorate’s passage of Proposal 3, amending our Constitution so that every elector qualified to vote in Michigan shall have the “right

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’