Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
5,308 results
0.32s
Pontiac School District v. Pontiac Education Association
Michigan Court of Appeals · Sep 15, 2015
“A motion under MCR 2.116(C)(8) may be granted only where the claims alleged are so clearly unenforceable as a matter of law that no factual development could possibly justify recovery.” … Accordingly, the Association has not established a plain error.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedMinter v. City of Grand Rapids
275 Mich. App. 220 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Aug 29, 2007
If a properly qualified doctor testifies "that there may be a serious neurological injury," there would automatically be a jury question. That did not occur here. … The majority's reversal is based on its conclusion that plaintiff's ability to care for herself and socialize with her friends "would seem to have been at least potentially affected." [4] But that is clearly not the test
Reversed in part by Minter v. City of Grand Rapids, 480 Mich. 1182 (2008)Cited 6 timesPublishedPeople of Michigan v. Jonathan Dewig Hickerson
Michigan Court of Appeals · Jan 21, 2016
as a reasonable trial strategy defense counsel’s focus on the lack of direct evidence that defendant Hickerson intended to kill anyone inside 839 Inglewood, irrespective that a second-degree murder during a home invasion qualifies … increases the penalty for a crime beyond the prescribed statutory maximum must be submitted to a jury and proved beyond a reasonable doubt. *** Clearly
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedPeople of Michigan v. April Marie Foster
Michigan Court of Appeals · Jan 15, 2015
The evidence at trial established that defendant and co-defendant David Hairston subjected AJ and AJ’s sister, KJ, to grievous physical abuse and neglect. … Defendant has the burden of establishing the factual predicate of his claim. People v Hoag, 460 Mich 1, 6; 594 NW2d 57 (1999).
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedNossonal Kleinfeldt v. Nicole Stern
Michigan Court of Appeals · Apr 18, 2024
Therefore, neither Michigan nor Florida qualified as AK’s home state for purposes of home-state jurisdiction. … Because the evidence does not clearly preponderate in an opposite direction, we affirm the trial court’s finding that an established custodial environment existed with both parties.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedIn Re turner/wanzer/wanzer-turner Minors
Michigan Court of Appeals · Apr 16, 2026
A trial court may appoint a temporary guardian in Michigan if that person is already “a guardian appointed, qualified, and serving in good standing in another state . . . .” MCL 700.5301a(1). … This evidence established that respondent-mother would likely have continuing psychiatric episodes in their presence or after leaving them.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedPaul E Debono v. Casey C Cummins
Michigan Court of Appeals · Jul 16, 2025
Because granting the parties’ joint custody would change the established custodial environment, plaintiff was required to establish that the change was in the child’s best interests by clear and convincing evidence. … The trial court clearly found this testimony to be credible based on its overall ruling.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedMichigan Court of Appeals · May 14, 2019
Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians appearing as a qualified expert witness on behalf of the Muscogee (Creek) Tribe. … The record clearly shows otherwise. Despite respondent’s somewhat combative attitude toward the court and workers, his allegations were taken seriously, investigated, substantiated, and addressed.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedMichigan Court of Appeals · Aug 4, 2022
Jones identified potential apartment buildings that respondent would qualify for. Jones further offered to contact the apartments on behalf of respondent, but respondent rejected Jones’ assistance. … Although respondent argued that she shared a bond with the children, the record clearly supports the finding that whatever bond existed was clearly outweighed by the children’s need for safety, permanency, and stability.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedPeople of Michigan v. Creighton Ronee McCullough
Michigan Court of Appeals · Apr 19, 2018
Moreover, defendant has failed to establish he did not understand the plea agreement. … conviction that the trial court clearly erred by denying defendant’s motion for a new trial.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedMichigan Court of Appeals · Jul 25, 2017
The Supreme Court also noted that the ADA requires that “no qualified individual with a disability shall, by reason of such disability, be excluded from participation in or be denied the benefits of the services, programs … -5- The evidence established that JG and PS had been in care for three years.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedMichigan Court of Appeals · Jul 25, 2017
The Supreme Court also noted that the ADA requires that “no qualified individual with a disability shall, by reason of such disability, be excluded from participation in or be denied the benefits of the services, programs … -5- The evidence established that JG and PS had been in care for three years.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedPeople of Michigan v. Desi Lee Henderson
Michigan Court of Appeals · May 18, 2023
Clearly and understandably LJ did not grasp the subtleties of the legal meaning of sexual penetration. … To qualify as an attempt, the act must clearly and directly be related to the crime the defendant is charged with attempting and not some other objective.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedPeople of Michigan v. Nicholas Lee Bowns
Michigan Court of Appeals · Feb 10, 2022
Instead, “movement of a victim that is incidental to the commission of a crime nonetheless qualifies as asportation.” Barrera, 500 Mich at 22. … In light of his admission under oath at the plea hearing, the record clearly reflects that he was lying when he repeatedly denied sexually assaulting his daughter.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedPeople of Michigan v. Douglas Ray Bemis
Michigan Court of Appeals · Oct 24, 2019
A trial court’s findings are clearly erroneous if, after review of the record, this Court is “definitely and firmly convinced” that the trial court made a mistake. … Defendant contends that People v White, 501 Mich 160; 905 NW2d 228 (2017), conclusively establishes that OV 4 was improperly scored in the present case. White, however, is distinguishable.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedMichigan Court of Appeals · Jul 25, 2017
Poston established the Thelma L. Poston Revocable Trust. Thelma acted as trustee until she and her husband, Carl C. Poston, Jr., appointed their son, respondent, successor trustee on March 28, 2011. … These findings are not clearly erroneous.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedMichigan Court of Appeals · Jul 25, 2017
Poston established the Thelma L. Poston Revocable Trust. Thelma acted as trustee until she and her husband, Carl C. Poston, Jr., appointed their son, respondent, successor trustee on March 28, 2011. … These findings are not clearly erroneous.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedPeople of Michigan v. Kemia Nekenah Hassel
Michigan Court of Appeals · Oct 27, 2022
The trial court’s findings on this issue are not clearly erroneous. … The trial court did not clearly err by finding that the Cipriano factors do not indicate an involuntary confession.
Cited 0 timesUnpublished298 Mich. App. 693 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Dec 4, 2012
The legislative body is deemed to have intended the meaning clearly expressed in an ordinance’s unambiguous language, which must be enforced as written. … BCO § 18-46 defines an “unsafe structure,” setting forth a number of qualifying criteria. BCO § 18-47 makes it “unlawful for an owner or agent to maintain or occupy an unsafe structure.”
Reversed on other grounds by Bonner v. City of Brighton, 495 Mich. 209 (2014)Cited 6 timesPublishedJon Steenland v. Ann S Tousciuk
Michigan Court of Appeals · May 16, 2019
Accordingly, the trial court’s determination regarding mooring was not clearly erroneous. … Defendant does not address the trial court’s reasoning or explain why the court’s findings were clearly erroneous.
Cited 0 timesUnpublished
Ask Donna