Case law

In Re Cross Minors

Michigan Court of Appeals · Nov 10, 2022

Accordingly, the trial court did not clearly err by finding that clear and convincing evidence established statutory grounds for termination of respondent’s parental rights under MCL 712A.19b(3)(c)(i). … The trial court properly considered the applicable factors and it did not clearly err by finding that a preponderance of the evidence established that the best interests of the children would be served by terminating respondent

Sam Foerster v. Carrice McKinstry

Michigan Court of Appeals · Jul 23, 2025

A trial court’s findings regarding the existence of an established custodial environment and regarding each custody factor should be affirmed unless the evidence clearly preponderates in the opposite … At other points during that same hearing, defendant said that she had “health concerns” and “immune compromised something.”

People of Michigan v. Samuel Ramon Smalley

Michigan Court of Appeals · Jan 14, 2016

Further, under MRE 804(a)(4), a deceased witness qualifies as unavailable. People v Farquharson, 274 Mich App 268, 272 n 1; 731 NW2d 797 (2007). … But, as already discussed, the victim’s prior testimony was clearly admissible from both an evidentiary standpoint and a constitutional one.

People of Michigan v. Ronald Joseph Hinman

Michigan Court of Appeals · Oct 29, 2020

Thus, the aunt’s statement does not qualify for admission under MRE 803(4). … However, the prosecutor’s remarks did not clearly make that assertion.

Estate of Michael Wrenn v. Spectrum Community Services

Michigan Court of Appeals · Feb 21, 2019

Clearly, there was a special relationship between Spectrum and Wrenn, and given this special relationship, Spectrum owed Wrenn a duty of care, including a duty to implement the Behavior Treatment Plan for Wrenn’s protection … s order denying the defendant’s claim of governmental immunity.”

People of Michigan v. Nicholas James Patton

325 Mich. App. 425 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Aug 2, 2018

Detective Peek was received at the preliminary examination as an expert witness qualified in the area of forensic examination of electronic devices. … But that case is clearly distinguishable from the instant case.

David Cobb v. Andrew Vanryn

Michigan Court of Appeals · Mar 19, 2025

Here, Andrew was also clearly involved in illegal conduct when he sold the controlled substance pills to Ian. … Contrary to plaintiffs’ contentions on appeal, the effect of the wrongful-conduct rule is not to immunize individuals who illegally sell dangerous controlled substances.

People of Michigan v. Nicholas Gage Bauer

Michigan Court of Appeals · Nov 24, 2025

And MCR 2.511(E)(1) permits a party to challenge a prospective juror for cause if the party discovers a juror is not qualified. … Assuming arguendo that three of defendant’s jurors were not qualified to serve pursuant to MCL 600.1307a(1)(d) because of their recent prior jury service, we nevertheless conclude that defendant has not established that he

People of Michigan v. Raymond Louis Treadway

Michigan Court of Appeals · Oct 22, 2024

As already addressed, defendant cannot establish that this error was outcome-determinative; therefore, he cannot establish that his right to present a defense was infringed. … Additionally, “[b]oth types of objects qualify as ‘weapons’ under MCL 777.31.”

New Properties, Inc v. George D Newpower, Jr, Inc

282 Mich. App. 120 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Jan 20, 2009

When Newpower recruited the Bank to come to Mancelona, he personally recommended Hart as a qualified manager to run the new business. … There was no change in, or addition to, the facts as established in the trial court record.

People of Michigan v. Nicholas Raad Bahri

Michigan Court of Appeals · Jun 27, 2024

Moreover, defendant has furnished no authority to suggest that a police officer testifying on the basis of training and experience must be qualified as an expert. … Clearly, photographs showing the victims’ bodies in deceased states were relevant, and thus admissible, subject only to restrictions imposed by MRE 403. Id.

People v. Kevorkian

248 Mich. App. 373 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Feb 5, 2002

The best way to do this is to state clearly the constitutional arguments that defendant does not raise. … He clearly and unequivocally waived his right to counsel.

People of Michigan v. Jahan Satati Green

Michigan Court of Appeals · Dec 19, 2017

Because the language of MCL 750.457 is unambiguous, this Court must “presume that the Legislature intended the meaning clearly expressed “[and] no further judicial construction is required or permitted, and the statute must … Only one instance of transporting a female for prostitution was required to establish each conviction.

in Re richardson/ragland Minors

Michigan Court of Appeals · Mar 26, 2019

Respondent-mother’s ability to appeal the initial dispositional order does not depend on whether the order qualifies as a “final” order. … DOCKET NO. 345143 (RESPONDENT-FATHER) Respondent-father argues that the trial court clearly erred by finding that statutory grounds for termination were established by clear and convincing evidence.

in Re guardianship/conservatorship of Harold William Gerstler

Michigan Court of Appeals · Jun 5, 2018

A factual finding is clearly erroneous when this Court is left with a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made. … If persons have equal priority, the court shall select the person the court considers best qualified to serve.

Vhs of Michigan Inc v. Allstate Insurance Company

Michigan Court of Appeals · Mar 10, 2026

“Therefore, whether a claimant’s benefits qualify as overdue and whether an insurer unreasonably refused to pay or unreasonably delayed in making payment determine if a claimant’s attorney may receive attorney fees.” … “If a claimant establishes the first prerequisite, a rebuttable presumption arises regarding the second.” Brown, 298 Mich App at 692.

Ibtihaj Shammout v. Kalamazoo Jaycee

Michigan Court of Appeals · Mar 29, 2016

This conduct potentially qualifies as negligence. I concede that the evidence concerning the timing of the tent flap installation conflicts. … That plaintiffs qualify as licensees does not change the definition of an open and obvious danger.

in Re Guardianship of David P Vanpoppelen

Michigan Court of Appeals · Dec 4, 2018

We clearly have a lot of contention on both sides. And, I do not want to see two young people being pushed, and prodded, and pulled. … A factual finding is clearly erroneous when this Court is left with a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made.

People of Michigan v. Ronnie Lamont Spears

Michigan Court of Appeals · Apr 20, 2023

“[A] trial court’s findings of fact are clearly erroneous if, after a review of the entire record, the appellate court is left with a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made.” … In fact, the trial court qualified its statement by noting that it “can do” an upward departure, not that it “would do” or “would be inclined to” impose an upward departure.

People of Michigan v. Camryn Teri Locash

Michigan Court of Appeals · Mar 25, 2021

Although we conclude that the trial court clearly erred when it found that defense counsel had adequately informed defendant of his Fifth Amendment rights, defendant has failed to establish that he was prejudiced by his counsel … A factual finding is clearly erroneous if this Court is “left with a definite and firm conviction that the trial court made a mistake.”