Case law

Thomas S Toteff v. Joseph H Hemming

Michigan Court of Appeals · Aug 21, 2018

If we were to apply the doctrine of judicial estoppel in cases such as this, a lawyer negligently giving bad advice to his or her client would always have immunity from a malpractice claim if that client relied on the bad … The proponent of evidence has the burden of establishing that it is relevant and admissible. Id. B.

in Re Austin Matson

Michigan Court of Appeals · Oct 24, 2017

The prosecution must establish by a preponderance of the evidence “that the best interests of the juvenile and the public would be served by waiver.” MCR 3.950(D)(2)(c). … Its factual findings were not clearly erroneous given the evidence presented.

Estate of Leah Carpenter v. Weiner & Associates Pllc

Michigan Court of Appeals · Oct 31, 2017

However, the Weiner defendants were not medical experts or practitioners; thus, they were not qualified to review the decedent’s treating providers’ recommendations. … However, admissible evidence clearly demonstrates that decedent subjectively experienced pain.

in Re Austin Matson

Michigan Court of Appeals · Oct 24, 2017

The prosecution must establish by a preponderance of the evidence “that the best interests of the juvenile and the public would be served by waiver.” MCR 3.950(D)(2)(c). … Its factual findings were not clearly erroneous given the evidence presented.

People of Michigan v. Ruben Joseph Rodriguez

Michigan Court of Appeals · Oct 21, 2014

The trial court’s determination that defendant fired his gun toward Frandson was not clearly erroneous. Random House Webster’s College Dictionary (2001) provides several definitions for “toward.” … While such conduct arguably qualifies as predatory, it is unclear whether this is what the trial court relied on.

Estate of Leah Carpenter v. Weiner & Associates Pllc

Michigan Court of Appeals · Oct 31, 2017

However, the Weiner defendants were not medical experts or practitioners; thus, they were not qualified to review the decedent’s treating providers’ recommendations. … However, admissible evidence clearly demonstrates that decedent subjectively experienced pain.

In Re C Young Minor

Michigan Court of Appeals · Jan 17, 2025

Respondent reported to her caseworker that she “more recently” attempted to reengage in services at CMH, but she was unable to do so because she no longer qualified for the services. … The trial court next found that, for many of the same reasons, DHHS had established by a preponderance of the evidence that termination was in CY’s best interests.

People of Michigan v. Michael Joseph Kvasnicka

Michigan Court of Appeals · Jul 21, 2025

In Counterman, recognizing that a statement can qualify as a true threat “solely on its objective content,” the Counterman Court considered “whether the First Amendment nonetheless demands that the State in a true-threats … If a statute criminalizes pure speech, then it “must be interpreted with the commands of the First Amendment clearly in mind.” Watts, 394 US at 707.

in Re X Ruiz-Gamez Minor

Michigan Court of Appeals · May 8, 2018

However, the CPS worker did not testify regarding any statements contained within the reports, and the record does not clearly establish that petitioner would not have been able to establish a foundation for the worker’s … Although this testimony qualifies as hearsay, respondent has made no attempt to explain how it affected her substantial rights.

In Re E E Sayranian Minor

Michigan Court of Appeals · Aug 18, 2022

She further admitted that her visits with the child were suspended after she exhibited mental illness while visiting with the child in March 2021, but later qualified this by stating that she and the foster care worker were … The trial court therefore clearly erred by finding that termination was warranted under MCL 712A.19b(3)(c)(ii).

Julie a Tenbusch v. Department of Treasury

Michigan Court of Appeals · Mar 5, 2019

The notice stated that the property did not qualify for the exemption for the tax years 2013-2016 and that a corrected property tax bill would be issued. … The purpose of the exclusionary discretion in R 287 then, is clearly to prevent unfair surprise and prejudice to the opposing party.

People of Michigan v. Aaron Michael Overbeek

Michigan Court of Appeals · Jul 16, 2015

“When defense counsel clearly expresses satisfaction with a trial court’s decision, counsel’s action will be deemed to constitute a waiver.” Id. … As the prosecutor argues, the detective was not qualified as an expert witness.

Pamela Grunau v. East Lansing Athletic Club Inc

Michigan Court of Appeals · Apr 14, 2022

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.” Id. … In addition, a plaintiff must establish the elements of ordinary negligence in a premises liability action: that the defendant owed the plaintiff a duty, the defendant breached that duty, the defendant’s breach proximately

People of Michigan v. Thomas Arthur Lemoine

Michigan Court of Appeals · Jul 17, 2018

Regarding the other three references that defendant challenges, for two of them the trial court clearly ruled in defendant’s favor and struck the testimony. … Thus, defendant has failed to establish the factual predicate for his claim.

in Re Frazier Minors

Michigan Court of Appeals · Jan 12, 2017

Although respondent’s friend testified that she was qualified to perform catheterizations and she would help respondent care for the children, the friend had a child of her own and her own employment responsibilities, which … Once statutory grounds for termination are established, the best interests of the child in having “a normal family home is superior to any interest the parent has.” In re Moss, 301 Mich App at 89 (citation omitted).

in Re Cook Minors

Michigan Court of Appeals · May 14, 2019

Jamila Lamb, who was qualified as an expert witness as a licensed psychologist, had met with JC twice a week since March 5, 2018. … Rosalynn Moten, a licensed clinical psychologist who was qualified as an expert, had performed a psychological evaluation on JC on June 27, 2018.

in Re Frazier Minors

Michigan Court of Appeals · Jan 12, 2017

Although respondent’s friend testified that she was qualified to perform catheterizations and she would help respondent care for the children, the friend had a child of her own and her own employment responsibilities, which … Once statutory grounds for termination are established, the best interests of the child in having “a normal family home is superior to any interest the parent has.” In re Moss, 301 Mich App at 89 (citation omitted).

People of Michigan v. Thomas Arthur Lemoine

Michigan Court of Appeals · Jul 17, 2018

Regarding the other three references that defendant challenges, for two of them the trial court clearly ruled in defendant’s favor and struck the testimony. … Thus, defendant has failed to establish the factual predicate for his claim.

People of Michigan v. Hector Gembe

Michigan Court of Appeals · Nov 18, 2014

VOUCHING ISSUES The lower court qualified psychologist Randall E. Haugen as an expert witness regarding the character and behavior of sexual assault victims, over defendant’s objection. … Wise’s testimony clearly implied that he will tell a suspect that he believes a victim even if he does not believe that fact to be true.

Milenium Inc v. Kml Communications Inc

Michigan Court of Appeals · Sep 14, 2023

These findings were not clearly erroneous. … ACCOUNT STATED Because defendant objected to the charges in the March 8, 2019 and August 8, 2019 invoices, no mutual assent to an account stated was established.