Case law

In Re eling/foster/fitzgerald Minors

Michigan Court of Appeals · Sep 15, 2022

First, respondent-mother argues that DHHS failed to accommodate her clearly apparent disabilities before she was officially diagnosed. … Respondent-mother has not established that she would have fared better had services been offered earlier in the case.

Scott P Gyorke v. Shelly B Gyorke

Michigan Court of Appeals · Apr 25, 2017

“In a divorce action, this Court reviews for clear error a trial court’s factual findings on the division of marital property and whether a particular asset qualifies as marital or separate property.” … “Findings of fact are clearly erroneous when this Court is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made.” Woodington v Shokoohi, 288 Mich App 352, 357; 792 NW2d 63 (2010).

People of Michigan v. Clarence Jeffrey Hunt

Michigan Court of Appeals · Jan 28, 2021

We conclude that the trial court did not clearly err by excluding evidence of the father’s immigration status on the ground that it was irrelevant. … Not just “any manner of preoffense conduct” qualifies for the higher assessment because that would require a 15-point assessment for OV 10 in every case, rendering the other scoring options nugatory.

People of Michigan v. Ryan James Murdock

Michigan Court of Appeals · Apr 17, 2018

Accordingly, the trial court’s factual finding that the victim suffered a serious psychological injury was not clearly erroneous, and was supported by a preponderance of the evidence. … Movement of a victim that is incidental to the commission of an offense qualifies as asportation within the meaning of MCL 777.38(1)(a).

Charter Township of Lansing v. Ingham County Clerk

Michigan Court of Appeals · Jul 20, 2023

See, e.g., Belair v City of Treasure Island, 611 So2d 1285, 1289 (CA Fla, 1992) (“the City’s argument that the law of the case has been established here is without merit. … The restrictive phrase “which charter township is contiguous on all sides with a city or village” clearly refers to the term “charter township” in the prior phrase and defines the type of “charter township” that is subject

Peter J Zirnhelt v. Township of Long Lake

Michigan Court of Appeals · Oct 29, 2019

However, plaintiff attempts to make much of the distinction between “qualified electors” and “registered electors.” … In any event, none of the above provisions actually establish an initiative process, but rather permit or direct an initiative process to be established.

in Re H H R Fargo Minor

Michigan Court of Appeals · Jun 14, 2018

In challenging the services offered, a respondent must establish that he or she would have fared better if other services had been offered. See In re Fried, 266 Mich App 535, 542-543; 702 NW2d 192 (2005). … REASONABLE EFFORTS The Michigan Supreme Court has explained that under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 USC 12101 et seq., “ ‘no qualified individual with a disability shall, by reason of such disability

Farmington Square Condominium Association v. Keith Mitan

Michigan Court of Appeals · Aug 11, 2025

Rather, it is well-established that corporations may act through agents. See Garey v Kelvinator Corp, 279 Mich 174, 191; 271 NW 723 (1937). … This was not clearly erroneous.

Adia Blacksher v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company

Michigan Court of Appeals · Dec 4, 2014

If the expenses are not allowable, they simply do not qualify as PIP benefits under the no-fault act. … Blacksher has thus failed to establish that any evidentiary error was outcome determinative.

People of Michigan v. Matti James Rickert

Michigan Court of Appeals · Apr 17, 2018

The testimony concerning Rickert’s propensity to commit acts of domestic violence and the surrounding circumstances of those acts was clearly prejudicial. That alone, however, was insufficient to bar their admission. … An expert may be qualified by “knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education.” MRE 702.

Spartan Specialties Ltd v. Senior Services Inc

Michigan Court of Appeals · Jul 20, 2017

Most of plaintiff’s argument concerns why Whitaker was not qualified to give testimony about “foundation failures” and remediation of those failures. … Plaintiff claims that it is entitled to a new trial because the verdict was clearly or grossly inadequate. See MCR 2.611(A)(1)(d).

Hazem Eltahawy v. Trinity Health-Michigan

Michigan Court of Appeals · Mar 25, 2025

In reply, defendants asserted that because the Agreement clearly provided that plaintiff was only entitled to payment for days that he was actually on call, and plaintiff did not complete any on-call shifts during the 90- … Under this framework, a plaintiff must first set forth a prima facie case of discrimination by presenting evidence that he or she (1) belongs to a protected class, (2) suffered an adverse employment action, (3) was qualified

People of Michigan v. Matti James Rickert

Michigan Court of Appeals · Apr 17, 2018

The testimony concerning Rickert’s propensity to commit acts of domestic violence and the surrounding circumstances of those acts was clearly prejudicial. That alone, however, was insufficient to bar their admission. … An expert may be qualified by “knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education.” MRE 702.

Kevin Androsian v. City of Taylor

Michigan Court of Appeals · Mar 11, 2025

pertinent part: Units of Local Government are hereby prohibited from levying any tax not authorized by law or charter when this section is ratified, without the approval of a majority of the qualified … “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.

People of Michigan v. Paul Dean Smith

Michigan Court of Appeals · Jan 7, 2021

. . record.”4 These foundational 4 Such requirements can be established “by the testimony of the custodian or other qualified witness, or by certification that complies with a rule promulgated by the supreme court or … “A finding of fact is clearly erroneous if, after a review of the entire record, an appellate court is left with a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made.”

Pantall Gallup LLC v. Mohamad Alnouri

Michigan Court of Appeals · Nov 6, 2014

The trial court clearly considered that the documents requested by defendants were missing such that spoliation occurred. … Clearly, then, nothing had changed.

Michael Alan Schwartz v. Sara Oltarz-Schwartz

Michigan Court of Appeals · Aug 9, 2018

On September 24, 2013, plaintiff admitted that he provided support and financial benefits to Mareski, but qualified his admission with the following statement: “The source of most of said support and/or financial benefits … “A finding is clearly erroneous if we are left with a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made.”

Michael Alan Schwartz v. Sara Oltarz-Schwartz

Michigan Court of Appeals · Aug 9, 2018

On September 24, 2013, plaintiff admitted that he provided support and financial benefits to Mareski, but qualified his admission with the following statement: “The source of most of said support and/or financial benefits … “A finding is clearly erroneous if we are left with a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made.”

Dana Charis Fort v. Michael Skyler Fort

Michigan Court of Appeals · Apr 22, 2021

A qualified expert in business valuation valued Fortified Coatings’ at $302,000 and estimated that defendant’s income was $75,000 per year. … “A finding is clearly erroneous if the appellate court, on all the evidence, is left with a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made.” Id. at 629.

Comerica Bank v. Pars Ice Cream Company Inc

Michigan Court of Appeals · Dec 18, 2018

The Mohammed guaranty is clearly not limited to the indebtedness under the Tumbleweed note. … Specifically, 12 CFR 1002.7(d) provides, in pertinent part: (1) Rule for qualified applicant.