Case law

People of Michigan v. Jadzia Nicole Checchi

Michigan Court of Appeals · Oct 10, 2024

“For spoken words to qualify as an assertive ‘statement’ under the hearsay rules, those words must contain an assertion of fact that is—when made—capable of being true or false.” … To establish entitlement to relief under plain-error review, the defendant must establish that an error occurred, that the error was plain, i.e., clear or obvious, and that the plain error affected substantial rights.”

Brianne Sanders v. Shady Awad

Michigan Court of Appeals · Apr 16, 2025

A motion under MCR 2.116(C)(8) may only be granted when a claim is so clearly unenforceable that no factual development could possibly justify recovery.” … Beulah Hoagland Appleton Qualified Personal Residence Trust v Emmet Co Rd Comm, 236 Mich App 546, 550; 600 NW2d 698 (1999).

20240222_C365747_28_365747.Opn.Pdf

Michigan Court of Appeals · Feb 22, 2024

STANDARDS OF REVIEW AND GOVERNING LAW “The standard of review on appeal in cases where a probate court sits without a jury is whether the court’s findings are clearly erroneous.” … The second sentence says, “Grantors intend to satisfy this distribution by naming their respective Children as beneficiaries of their qualified retirement plans.” (Emphasis added.)

In Re gary/moncrief Minors

Michigan Court of Appeals · Oct 19, 2023

“To terminate parental rights, a trial court must find by clear and convincing evidence that at least one statutory ground under MCL 712A.19b(3) has been established.” … During trial, Albany noted MM qualified as a child with special needs due to her mental health issues, particularly with self-harm, and Albany subsequently informed respondent of the matter to allow MM to undergo a psychological

In Re Legoas Minors

Michigan Court of Appeals · Sep 21, 2023

-5-  Respondents next argue the trial court clearly erred by finding that statutory grounds for terminating their parental rights were established by clear and convincing … Because it was not established by clear and convincing evidence that either respondent abused BL, the trial court clearly erred by finding statutory grounds to terminate respondents’ parental rights under MCL 712A.19b(3)(

Lawrence S Holman v. Farm Bureau General Ins Co

Michigan Court of Appeals · Aug 4, 2022

Heinzman contended that Holman I clearly placed the burden on plaintiff to ensure that information contained in the application was accurate, even if it was Heinzman who filled it out. … We additionally conclude that plaintiff’s -5-  admitted failure to read the policy could qualify as comparative negligence and that the trial court should

Lawrence S Holman v. Farm Bureau General Ins Co

Michigan Court of Appeals · Aug 4, 2022

Heinzman contended that Holman I clearly placed the burden on plaintiff to ensure that information contained in the application was accurate, even if it was Heinzman who filled it out. … We additionally conclude that plaintiff’s -5-  admitted failure to read the policy could qualify as comparative negligence and that the trial court should

Consumers Power Co. v. Department of Treasury

235 Mich. App. 380 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Jul 27, 1999

This issue clearly depends on our interpretation of subsection 9(3)’s language. Statutory interpretation issues are questions of law and are therefore reviewed de novo. … The environmental tax shared termination dates with the other excise taxes that Congress enacted at the same time because all the taxes shared *397 the same purpose — to establish within the Superfund a certain amount of

People of Michigan v. Jonathan Ernest Manwell

Michigan Court of Appeals · Oct 29, 2020

The testimony qualified as plain error because Dr. Simms vouched for the victim’s testimony in violation of the “straightforward bright-line test” as stated in Smith. Thorpe, 504 Mich at 262. … Simms “clearly vouched for [the complainant’s] credibility. Id.

People of Michigan v. James David Allan

Michigan Court of Appeals · Apr 11, 2024

To establish ineffective assistance of counsel, defendant must first establish that counsel’s performance was deficient, which involves consideration of “whether, in light of all the circumstances, the identified acts or … The record clearly discloses that defense counsel considered and explored different options for responding to Dr. Diaz’s sudden and unexpected unavailability.

MacKinaw Area Tourist Bureau Inc v. Village of MacKinaw City

Michigan Court of Appeals · May 23, 2024

For instance, if the plaintiff in Shaw had been able to establish that the city was using funds obtained from water and sewer rates to pay for the sewer-separation project, she may well have been able to establish a Headlee … The Village did not need to establish that its rate structures were proportionate; plaintiff bore the burden of establishing both that the Village’s rates were unreasonable and disproportionate.

20250220_C369009_41_369009.Opn.Pdf

Michigan Court of Appeals · Feb 20, 2025

An expert’s testimony is insufficient if it merely establishes a connection between conduct and an injury for purposes of establishing causation in a medical malpractice action. … This Court explained that the testimony was insufficient: [T]he record clearly reflects that [the expert] had no reasonable basis in evidence to support his position that plaintiff’s left ventricular heart

Jcp Trust V Peter E O'Dovero

Michigan Court of Appeals · Jul 14, 2022

(vi) Instruct a trustee and determine relative to a trustee the existence or nonexistence of an immunity, power, privilege, duty, or right. … PEO also testified that the trust was established to avoid tax liability.

People v. Johnson

83 Mich. App. 1 · Michigan Court of Appeals · May 8, 1978

Clearly, neither the prosecution nor the defendant should be given an advantage by the way the request for a theory-of-the-case instruction is phrased. … Therefore, since the prosecutor presented evidence to support each *17 element of the crime charged, a prima facie case was established, sufficient to preclude a directed verdict.

People of Michigan v. David Allen Orbon

Michigan Court of Appeals · Jun 10, 2025

The prosecution bears the burden of establishing facts in support of a particular score by a preponderance of the evidence. People v Osantowski, 481 Mich 103, 111; 748 NW2d 799 (2008). … Id. at 420. 1 See, e.g., People v Jones, unpublished per curiam opinion of the Court of Appeals, issued September 17, 2019 (Docket No. 342000), p 5 (holding that “urine does not qualify as a harmful substance under

in Re Mikes Sr Estate

Michigan Court of Appeals · Mar 17, 2015

This standard was clearly met here, the court found, by the criminal proceedings in which respondent pleaded guilty to second- degree murder. … Thus, by accepting respondent’s plea, the circuit court necessarily found that respondent failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that he lacked the capacity to either appreciate “the nature and qualify or

Stuart D Roeder v. Global Express Services LLC

Michigan Court of Appeals · Jun 13, 2017

Roeder intended to establish from the metadata connected with the file that Raad had not drafted the letter in January 2013. … Accordingly, we cannot conclude that the trial court clearly erred in finding that Raad did not send the letter in January 2013.

Elijah Eleby v. Detroit Land Bank Authority

Michigan Court of Appeals · Mar 13, 2026

Plaintiff asserted that this clearly violated the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition against unreasonable search and seizure. … -2- was “the moving force” behind the constitutional violation to establish liability under § 1983.

Marshall v. Consumers Power Co.

65 Mich. App. 237 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Oct 27, 1975

The agency was established to fulfill the often conflicting goals of both regulating and promoting nuclear energy. … Michigan utilities are not immune from zoning ordinances.

In Re black/milton/williams Minors

Michigan Court of Appeals · May 20, 2025

“When challenging the services offered, a respondent must establish that he or she would have fared better if other services had been offered.” Sanborn, 337 Mich App at 264. … Factual findings are clearly erroneous when this Court has a firm and definite conviction that a mistake has been made. Id. at 709-710.