Case law

In Re Bem Estate

247 Mich. App. 427 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Dec 12, 2001

The signature for the August 15 will clearly follows the material provisions written on the first page and the top of the second page. … attempt to republish the August 15 will because it did not reaffirm the substance of the August 15 will at all. 30 Nor does the line constitute a codicil because it makes no attempt to “explain, modify, add to, subtract from, qualify

Duncan v. State

300 Mich. App. 176 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Apr 2, 2013

Clearly, the Supreme Court approved the majority’s decision in the original appeal to uphold the trial court’s denial of summary disposition. But it did so for “different reasons.” … The moving party is immune as a matter of law. Duncan I, 284 Mich App at 259 (emphasis added).

Robert Gardner v. Michigan State University

Michigan Court of Appeals · Jun 6, 2024

The trial court reasoned that plaintiff had failed to allege particularized facts establishing that he was qualified for the positions or that there were facts or circumstances giving rise to an inference of discrimination … “The party must clearly identify the disputed issue for which it asserts discovery must be conducted and support the issue with independent evidence.”

Studier v. Michigan Public School Employees' Retirement Board

260 Mich. App. 460 · Michigan Court of Appeals · May 4, 2004

Section 91 now provides that the mpsers shall pay the entire monthly premium of a retiree but a retiree must pay a portion of the premium if he or she is a deferred member, does not qualify for Medicare, or has a dependent … To test for the valid accommodation of the Contract Clause and the state’s police power, the United States Supreme Court has established a three-pronged test.

Committee for Marshall-Not the Megasite v. City of Marshall

Michigan Court of Appeals · Feb 25, 2026

Thus, the appropriations for funding the project are clearly “germane, auxiliary, or incidental to that general purpose[,]” id. … The entity to which the City is alleged to have contracted out its zoning power— the JPC—does not qualify as a “local unit” under the statute.

Gillette Commercial Operations North America & Subsidiaries v. Department of Treasury

312 Mich. App. 394 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Sep 29, 2015

In conducting this constitutional review, we give deference to the legislative branch by presuming statutes to be constitutional, and we will construe them as constitutional unless their unconstitutionality is clearly apparent … Since no citizen enjoys immunity from that burden, its retroactive imposition does not necessarily infringe due process, and to challenge the present tax it is not enough to point out that the taxable event,

Republic Airlines, Inc v. Department of Treasury

169 Mich. App. 674 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Jul 5, 1988

For the tax years begin *679 ning after December 31, 1976, the percentage established for the 5-year average liability for the 1976 tax year shall be used for calculating this minimum tax. … Clearly the Legislature intended to grant transportation companies a reduction in tax liability during the phase-in period based on the perception that the adoption of the sbta would create substantial uncertainty as to their

Bolt v. City of Lansing

604 N.W.2d 745 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Jan 25, 2000

Prospective application is preferred when overruling an established precedent or when deciding an issue of first impression whose resolution was not clearly foreshadowed.... … Application of the full three-part test is necessary, however, only if the threshold question whether the decision in question clearly establishes a new principle of law is answered in the affirmative.

Taghreed Meyou v. the Kroger Company

Michigan Court of Appeals · Nov 20, 2025

In enacting MCL 333.20176a, the Legislature clearly expressed a desire to further that policy by prohibiting retaliation against an employee who reports malpractice. … (3) she was qualified for the position, and (4) she was replaced by a younger person.”

Miller v. Citizens Insurance

288 Mich. App. 424 · Michigan Court of Appeals · May 13, 2010

Ruppman also testified that before Ryan was admitted to RIM, a RIM employee, Kathleen Clawson, went to see him to determine if he qualified for care at RIM. … That case, however, is clearly distinguishable.

D Travis Strasser v. Oakwood Heritage Hospital

Michigan Court of Appeals · Nov 4, 2021

To establish a cause of action for medical malpractice, a plaintiff must establish four elements: (1) the appropriate standard of care governing the defendant’s conduct at the time of the purported negligence … Thus, MCL 600.2169(1)(a) is clearly met, regardless of which of these specialties Dr.

Roberts v. Titan Insurance

281 Mich. App. 551 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Dec 4, 2008

Therefore, the record establishes that Irwin had use of the vehicle for a period greater than 30 days. … Relying on this provision, Titan argues that the insurance policy alone clearly precludes coverage for Roberts’s claims.

Michael Wolf v. Kalkaska County Road Commission

Michigan Court of Appeals · Aug 25, 2022

Each of these claims requires the passage of time to establish. … Plaintiffs’ complaint clearly lays out a set of facts from which, if proven true, a reasonable factfinder could conclude that plaintiffs established a claim for common-law abandonment.

Mark J Kollar v. Briana Sparks

Michigan Court of Appeals · Oct 26, 2023

Kollar, clearly, does wish to maintain paternity. … The record established that AJK could not have been conceived during the term of the marriage, and there was a DNA test that conclusively established that Lewis was AJK’s biological father.

Henderson v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co.

225 Mich. App. 703 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Jan 8, 1998

Also, a court may establish the meaning of a term through a dictionary definition. Michigan Millers Mut Ins Co v Bronson Plating Co, 445 Mich 558, 568 ; 519 NW2d 864 (1994); Fitch, supra at 472 . … In so concluding, Odom clearly indicates that the phrase “in the care of” would be ambiguous if the question were whether the phrase meant “legal care” versus “physical care.” Id.

Okrie v. State

306 Mich. App. 445 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Aug 19, 2014

The Court of Claims Act reflects the state’s waiver of sovereign immunity from suit and submission to a court’s jurisdiction. Greenfield Constr Co, 402 Mich at 195 . The Court of Claims thus was legislatively created. … The Constitution of 1835 established the Supreme Court as the lone constitutional court in Michigan, but *455 also indicated that the Legislature could establish other courts.

in Re pickworth/little Minors

Michigan Court of Appeals · Sep 12, 2017

In order to terminate parental rights, the trial court must find that at least one of the statutory grounds for termination has been established by clear and convincing evidence. … BL’s foster parents often took her to a doctor because of her poor immune system.

Oneida Charter Township v. City of Grand Ledge

282 Mich. App. 435 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Feb 12, 2009

Clearly, Grand Ledge has a water system but the system is not a contractual customer; it is not under contract to buy water from another department. … Because Grand Ledge qualifies under the exemption, if viewed in isolation, the general actual cost provision of subsection 2 would not apply to the rates charged to Oneida residents.

Patricia Wendel v. Ford Motor Company

Michigan Court of Appeals · Sep 5, 2024

A motion under MCR 2.116(C)(7) is on the grounds of “release, payment, prior judgment, immunity granted by law, statute of limitations, statute of frauds, an agreement to arbitrate or to litigate in a different forum, infancy … undisputed facts establish that summary disposition would be appropriate.”

Zug Island Fuels Company LLC v. Department of Treasury

Michigan Court of Appeals · Apr 14, 2022

There is no dispute that the purchased coal itself, at the contract prices thereon, qualified for the inventory deduction under MCL 208.1203(3) and MCL 208.1113(6)(a). … The terms “freight,” “shipping,” “delivery,” and “engineering” are quite clearly used as separate adjectives modifying or describing the plural noun “charges”; they cannot logically stand on their own and make sense in the