Case law

NL Ventures VI Farmington, LLC v. City of Livonia

314 Mich. App. 222 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Dec 22, 2015

“A necessary corollary to the plain meaning rule is that courts should give the ordinary and accepted meaning to the mandatory word ‘shall’ and the permissive word ‘may’ unless to do so would clearly frustrate legislative … It is in regard to these claims that defendant asserts governmental immunity.

People v. Watt

210 Mich. App. 92 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Apr 21, 1995

The parties agree that the controlling guidelines for resolving the question were established by our Supreme Court in People v Cooper, 398 Mich 450 ; 247 NW2d 866 (1976). … Instead, under the dual-sovereignty doctrine, as qualified by Cooper , defendant’s state court prosecution was permitted. Affirmed.

Great Lakes Steel Division of National Steel Corp. v. Michigan Public Service Commission

130 Mich. App. 470 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Nov 21, 1983

not supported by competent, material, and substantial *477 evidence on the record; and (4) was arbitrary, capricious, and clearly an abuse of discretion. … Clearly, this testimony supplied a sufficient factual basis for the MPSC’s conclusion that the rate design would benefit low income persons. Dr.

People of Michigan v. Shane Michael Auernhammer

Michigan Court of Appeals · Nov 10, 2015

The trial court correctly imposed a penalty on defendant since he failed to establish that he was entitled to protection under § 4(i). … penalty phase of the proceedings since defendant was not entitled to immunity under § 4(i).

Trevor Legassick v. University of Michigan Regents

Michigan Court of Appeals · Nov 19, 2019

Further, whenever a litigant meets the requirements of MCR 2.605, it is sufficient to establish standing to seek a declaratory judgment. … Prudently, in this instance, the Legislature clearly expressed that the purpose of the MTC was to “foster certainty in the law so that settlors of trusts will have confidence that their instructions will be carried out as

Richardson v. Ryder Truck Rental, Inc.

213 Mich. App. 447 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Sep 15, 1995

An expert witness is one who has been qualified by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education and is used where scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand evidence … As previously stated by this Court regarding the predecessor to MCR 2.313(C)(3), GCR 1963, 313.3: "The mere fact that the matter was proved at the trial does not, of itself, establish that the denial in response to the request

Martin v. Secretary of State

280 Mich. App. 417 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Aug 21, 2008

Clearly, appellants, as incumbent judges, have an interest in the subject matter of the litigation, because the results of such litigation would determine whether they run unopposed in the November 2008 election or face a … For the same reasons that appellants did not establish that they suffered a concrete and particularized injury that rendered them aggrieved parties under MCR 7.203(A), we also conclude that they have failed to establish the

Louya v. William Beaumont Hospital

190 Mich. App. 151 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Jul 8, 1991

Before enactment of the statute in question, no requirement to post a bond or obtain a letter of merit from a qualified professional existed. … Check contends that the medical records establish that Balita’s problems were not related to the labor and delivery managed by Dr.

Danny Burton v. State of Michigan

Michigan Court of Appeals · Feb 24, 2022

Thus, “[t]he WICA is an express waiver of the state’s sovereign immunity.” Id. … Plaintiff acknowledged at oral argument that such an outcome would “ideally” be required by the legislature, but he nonetheless maintains that because the legislature has not clearly done so, we should establish caselaw to

Bannan v. City of Saginaw

120 Mich. App. 307 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Oct 7, 1982

Although the stipulation does not expressly state that the pension was either a retirement or disability pension, the documents attached to the stipulation, incorporated by reference, establish clearly that the pension was … However, the question raised is whether Giffin was so clearly qualified as a duty-disabled pensioner that *324 the trial court was legally justified in issuing a writ of mandamus.

People v. Frank Smith

43 Mich. App. 400 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Oct 25, 1972

Thus, a search and seizure authorized by a search warrant that meets the requirements of the second clause clearly qualifies as a reasonable search, and evidence so obtained will usually be admissible in any subsequent criminal … It is true that the night clerk clearly and unambiguously consented to the search.

People v. Kosters

175 Mich. App. 748 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Mar 20, 1989

The fact of sexual abuse was clearly shown as to both children. … In the instant case, none of these things was *771 established.

Danny Burton v. State of Michigan

Michigan Court of Appeals · Feb 24, 2022

Thus, “[t]he WICA is an express waiver of the state’s sovereign immunity.” Id. … Plaintiff acknowledged at oral argument that such an outcome would “ideally” be required by the legislature, but he nonetheless maintains that because the legislature has not clearly done so, we should establish caselaw to

Brinkley v. Brinkley

277 Mich. App. 23 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Oct 16, 2007

Parents who do come within one of the categories in MCL 722.27b(1), and who do not satisfy MCL 722.27b(5), are granted only qualified deference. … This Court held that the trial court clearly erred in ruling that the motion was barred by the doctrine of res judicata.

People v. Dorris

95 Mich. App. 760 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Mar 4, 1980

The gist of defendants’ argument is that the testimony of the only qualified expert was that defendants were not in possession of "Molotov cocktails”. … Clearly, there was sufficient evidence adduced to allow the jury to conclude that defendants had possession of the devices.

Emily Schenk v. Judith Hodge

Michigan Court of Appeals · Aug 20, 2025

This requirement must be met in order for a function to qualify as a proprietary function. … Thus, the Township’s internal training policies cannot fix the standard of care in order to establish ordinary negligence. As such, it also cannot establish gross negligence.

People v. Lane

308 Mich. App. 38 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Nov 13, 2014

Clearly, the four-part test adopted by this Court to ensure the reliability of tracking dog evidence does not exactly correlate to the use of cadaver dogs. … In sum, we conclude that cadaver dog evidence is sufficiently reliable if the proponent of the evidence establishes the foundation that (1) the handler was qualified to use the dog; (2) the dog was trained and accurate in

Jeminson v. Montgomery Real Estate & Co.

47 Mich. App. 731 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Jun 26, 1973

Clearly, there is no business reason or well-pleaded allegations by the plaintiff why a mortgagee who is the beneficiary of a FHA mortgage policy should go to the expense and trouble of inspecting the subject premises. … Plaintiff has advanced no viable economic theory upon which to impose liability on the mortgage corporation; she must rely on established legal doctrines.

Blue Water Cannabis Company LLC v. City of Westland

Michigan Court of Appeals · Apr 13, 2023

The court rules do not clearly compel such a conclusion. … The City and its officials were clearly engaged in the exercise of a governmental function and the City, as a governmental agency, is therefore immune from tort liability. MCL 691.1407(1).

Smith v. City of Flint

313 Mich. App. 141 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Nov 5, 2015

Accordingly, if plaintiff is to prevail, he must allege facts to show that he qualified as a type 1 whistle-blower, i.e., that he reported or was about to report a violation of the law to a public body. … Clearly, there are other nonpersonnel expenses that are necessary for both the police and fire departments, so that the entirety of the funds could not be used for new hires.