Case law

People v. Roger Harris

80 Mich. App. 161 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Dec 5, 1977

If the underlying crime involves murder, extortion or taking a hostage, movement incidental thereto is generally sufficient to establish a valid statutory kidnapping.” Adams, supra, p 238 . (Emphasis supplied.) … The problem arises because the trial court added the qualifying language "during the armed robbery”.

Heyler v. Dixon

160 Mich. App. 130 · Michigan Court of Appeals · May 8, 1987

In People v Grisham, 125 Mich App 280, 286 ; 335 NW2d 680 (1983), our Court ruled that "any witness is qualified to testify as to his or her physical observations and opinions formed as a result of those observations.” … Clearly, Barbara Heyler was comparatively negligent. To apply that negligence only against the intoxicated driver and not against the establishment which provided the intoxicants would cause inconsistent verdicts.

Robert Davis v. Secretary of State

Michigan Court of Appeals · Apr 20, 2023

At a minimum, the separate opinions by Justices Viviano and Welch suggest that defendant did not hold a clearly unreasonable belief that the challenged candidates’ AOIs were facially proper. … The plaintiff also bears the burden of establishing entitlement to declaratory relief. Gracey, 182 Mich App at 203.

William Lanzi v. Township of St Clair

Michigan Court of Appeals · May 23, 2017

Defendant further argued that plaintiffs had not plead or established that governmental immunity should be avoided under the sewage disposal system event exception. … Thus, the plaintiff could not establish that the defendant was not entitled to governmental immunity pursuant to MCL 691.1417. Id. at 55.

Isabelle Brourman v. University of Michigan

Michigan Court of Appeals · Dec 21, 2023

Generally, Michigan and its agencies are immune from tort liability under the governmental tort liability act (GTLA), MCL 691.1401 et seq., but there are enumerated several exceptions to governmental immunity. … “[W]hile MCL 600.6431 does not ‘confer governmental immunity,’ it establishes conditions precedent for avoiding the governmental immunity conferred by the GTLA, which expressly incorporates MCL 600.6431.”

Department of Education v. Grosse Pointe Public Schools

266 Mich. App. 258 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Jul 26, 2005

Chapter X of the State Plan is clearly an interpretive statement of the ASA, the MMSEA, and the rules promulgated pursuant to the MMSEA. … Further, appellant cannot establish a cause under either statute because it is not a qualified individual being excluded from or denied something. See § 504; 42 USC 12132.

Prudential Property & Casualty Co. v. Department of Treasury

272 Mich. App. 269 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Dec 27, 2006

The statutory language in MCL 500.476b clearly and unambiguously prohibited plaintiffs’ conduct, and the trial court erred to the extent that it held otherwise. … Defendant has consistently argued that plaintiffs could only claim tax credits, if any, for expenses that would qualify for tax credits *283 in their home states.

Khaled Zakharia v. Michigan Montessori Internationale Inc

Michigan Court of Appeals · Oct 27, 2025

Plaintiffs concede that defendants enjoy a qualified privilege due to their shared interest in the management of the school. … A qualified privilege can be overcome only if the plaintiff can prove actual malice. Plaintiffs here cannot.

Deanna Ray v. City of Lansing

Michigan Court of Appeals · Apr 17, 2018

In Willett, 271 Mich App at 47, the plaintiff argued that the defendant was not entitled to governmental immunity because the plaintiff had established the elements of MCL 691.1417(2). … Although MCL 691.1417(3) “clearly provides [plaintiffs’] a potential cause of action,” Bosanic v Motz Dev, Inc, 277 Mich App 277, 283; 745 NW2d 513 (2007), the sewage-disposal- system-event exception to governmental immunity

Adair v. State

302 Mich. App. 305 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Aug 22, 2013

Clearly, the Legislature is in a position far superior to plaintiffs’ to determine what the actual cost to itself would be if it performed the increased recordkeeping and reporting duties. … Although the Adair I majority qualified its ruling that a “plaintiff need not show the amount of increased costs” with the prefatory phrase “[i]f no state appropriation was made to cover the increased burden on local government

Yoost v. Caspari

295 Mich. App. 209 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Jan 17, 2012

Zalcberg’s counterclaim pursuant to MCR 2.116(C)(1), asserting that the trial court lacked personal jurisdiction over him because he was a resident of Florida and had neither engaged in any business in Michigan nor had any qualifying … We find each case clearly distinguishable from the facts as established by the evidence submitted on Asher’s motion for summary disposition.

NeBoShone Ass'n v. State Tax Commission

58 Mich. App. 324 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Feb 10, 1975

Have you ever attempted to qualify for any of them? 'A. Well, I’m in the process now. "Q. Process now, to what? "A. To proceed with the techniques in MAI or attempt to, let’s put it that way. ”Q. … The tax roll and the tax statement shall clearly set forth the latest state equalized valuation for each item or property which shall be determined by using a separate factor for personal property and a separate factor for

Brooke Krueger v. Trevor John Curler

Michigan Court of Appeals · Jun 18, 2026

However, the assertion that KC was, in fact, diagnosed by a qualified medical professional with autism was hearsay to the extent it was offered to prove that fact. … At any rate, there is no indication that the referee did not consider these videos and the testimony about them, and they do not establish that the evidence “clearly preponderates in the opposite direction.”

Miller v. Magline, Inc.

76 Mich. App. 284 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Jun 20, 1977

Whereas previous resolutions had provided for employment "during the fiscal year”, the 1962 resolutions provided for employment "during the fiscal year ending June 30, 1963 and until his successor be duly elected and qualify … Thus, the chancellor correctly placed the burden on plaintiffs of establishing that the compensation received by the individual defendants was excessive.

People v. Gilmore

222 Mich. App. 442 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Mar 25, 1997

We review trial court factual findings under the clearly erroneous standard. People v Swirles (After Remand), 218 Mich App 133, 136 ; 553 NW2d 357 (1996). We review constitutional questions of law de novo. … However, such general allegations of prejudice are insufficient to establish that he was denied his right to a speedy trial.

William Lanzi v. Township of St Clair

Michigan Court of Appeals · May 23, 2017

Defendant further argued that plaintiffs had not plead or established that governmental immunity should be avoided under the sewage disposal system event exception. … Thus, the plaintiff could not establish that the defendant was not entitled to governmental immunity pursuant to MCL 691.1417. Id. at 55.

Jeanine D Smith v. City of Detroit

Michigan Court of Appeals · Sep 2, 2021

They additionally contended that they were immune from liability because Sullivan’s conduct did not amount to gross negligence as a matter of law and because the motor-vehicle exception to governmental immunity did not apply … Bleiberg’s affidavit clearly provided evidence that Smith suffered an injury arising out of the accident. His credibility is also for the jury to assess. Id.

Kamal Nassar v. City of Dearborn

Michigan Court of Appeals · Apr 20, 2017

The applicability of governmental immunity and the statutory exceptions to immunity are also reviewed de novo on appeal. … , given the location of the grass and the nature of other features, established the fact that the location of the pothole at issue was not on part of the Paul St. highway overpass, which is the area that the city claimed

People v. O'BRIEN

113 Mich. App. 183 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Feb 17, 1982

Four prosecution witnesses clearly established defendant’s presence in the City of Jackson at about 1 a.m. on April 27, 1978. Sgt. … Defendant’s failure to object, at trial, to King’s testimony on the ground that he was not qualified to give an opinion on the matter waives this issue on appeal.

Estate of Charles R Round v. Trinidad Resort and Club LLC

Michigan Court of Appeals · Sep 15, 2022

Relevant to this case is the immunity related to snow-making equipment. … Clearly, snow-making equipment that is located on a ski run and which extends more than 6 feet above the snow surface need not be marked.