Case law

People of Michigan v. Jason Anthony Ryan

Michigan Court of Appeals · May 11, 2017

Rather, counsel was unable to call the witness due to her own error, which qualifies as objectively unreasonable. … Defendant has not shown that the trial court clearly erred in finding that corroborating circumstances did not clearly indicate the trustworthiness of Peterson’s statements.

Patricia Batista v. Office of Retirement Services

Michigan Court of Appeals · Aug 12, 2021

The retirement system is intended to “be a qualified pension plan created in trust under section 401 of the internal revenue code, 26 USC 401[.]” MCL 38.1408(1). … STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION In Slis v Michigan, 332 Mich App 312, 335-336; 956 NW2d 569 (2020), this Court recited the well-established rules of statutory construction:

in Re B v. Provenzano Minor

Michigan Court of Appeals · May 14, 2019

DHHS, in establishing a plan for reunification services “must comply with the ADA.” In re Terry, 240 Mich App 14, 25; 610 NW2d 563 (2000). … “Title II of 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, or activities of a

People of Michigan v. Thomas James Martin

Michigan Court of Appeals · Apr 30, 2020

Accordingly, the statements do not qualify as testimonial. … Counsel otherwise argued that the evidence did not establish that Martin was involved in the offense.

People v. Maynor

256 Mich. App. 238 · Michigan Court of Appeals · May 29, 2003

reference to the phrase ‘offer to vote,’ words typically found in specific intent statutes.” 35 The Disimone panel concluded that in proving that the defendant made an “offer to vote,” the prosecutor was not required to establish … The Henry panel also cited 21 Am Jur 2d, Criminal Law, § 130, p 215, which states that, “[i]n the absence of qualifying provisions, the terms ‘intent’ and ‘intentional’ in a criminal statute refer to general criminal intent

People of Michigan v. Craig Richard Pakosz

Michigan Court of Appeals · Jul 28, 2022

A finding is clearly erroneous if this Court is “left with a definite and firm conviction that the trial court made a mistake.” … However, the two were clearly residing together in the apartment on the date when the strangulation occurred.

People of Michigan v. Jeffrey Thomas Mazur

Michigan Court of Appeals · May 5, 2015

The issues regarding whether defendant qualified as a “principal -1- occupant” of the home and, if so, whether he employed the camera pen for a “lewd or lascivious purpose” … Defendant has not even alleged prejudice, let alone established that any misconduct affected the outcome of his trial.

People of Michigan v. Henry Lee Smith

Michigan Court of Appeals · Jan 26, 2017

To establish that the prosecutor violated a defendant’s due process rights in failing to disclose evidence, the defendant must establish that: (1) the state possessed and failed to disclose evidence; (2) the undisclosed evidence … qualified as “either exculpatory or impeaching”; (3) a reasonable probability existed that, “had the evidence been disclosed to the defense,” the outcome of the proceedings would have differed.

20240215_C364826_29_364826.Opn.Pdf

Michigan Court of Appeals · Feb 15, 2024

Barish concluded that the Tingley survey incorrectly established the far westerly boundary line. … Defendant then called David Merchant, who was qualified as an expert witness, and he owns Merchant Excavating.

Robert Murray v. Chesapeake Energy Corp

Michigan Court of Appeals · Mar 19, 2020

To receive payment from the fund, qualified landowners were first required to execute a release. … Plaintiffs further argue that they qualify as third-party beneficiaries of the June 25 agreement.

20250127_C363306_49_363306D.Opn.Pdf

Michigan Court of Appeals · Jan 27, 2025

The Wayne Circuit Court dismissed the case on the basis of governmental immunity and the fact that there was probable cause for his arrest. … undisputed facts establish that summary disposition would be appropriate.”

People of Michigan v. Henry Lee Smith

Michigan Court of Appeals · Jan 26, 2017

To establish that the prosecutor violated a defendant’s due process rights in failing to disclose evidence, the defendant must establish that: (1) the state possessed and failed to disclose evidence; (2) the undisclosed evidence … qualified as “either exculpatory or impeaching”; (3) a reasonable probability existed that, “had the evidence been disclosed to the defense,” the outcome of the proceedings would have differed.

In Re D M West Minor

Michigan Court of Appeals · Sep 1, 2022

Wiggins testified that she would investigate father’s disability income, which would qualify as a legal source of income. … Accordingly, the trial court did not clearly err by finding that MCL 712A.19b(3)(c)(i) had been proven by clear and convincing evidence. “Only one statutory ground for termination need be established.”

20230112_C359226_33_359226.Opn.Pdf

Michigan Court of Appeals · Jan 12, 2023

However, the transfer requirement clearly was a child support award, and the consent judgment provided for equal parenting time of alternating weeks. … Shana established that circumstances had changed since entry of the consent judgment and UCSO deviation addendum.

People of Michigan v. Brian Edward Borowka Jr

Michigan Court of Appeals · Sep 17, 2019

But counsel clashed about whether the prosecution could establish the prerequisites for admission of the 404(b) evidence. … Moreover, the record fails to establish that BQ’s testimony was material to the case, as it had not been evaluated for relevance or prejudice.

People of Michigan v. Karen Sue Boes

Michigan Court of Appeals · Jul 22, 2025

Regarding defendant’s false confession evidence, the trial court held that defendant had not established the existence of newly-discovered evidence. … The trial court also found, regarding Lord’s report, that the prosecution had presented “a credible expert that has clearly reviewed the whole of the evidence and offered an opinion supportive of De Haan and Marquardt’s.”

William Froling v. City of Bloomfield Hills

Michigan Court of Appeals · Nov 8, 2016

First, the Frolings were clearly aware of the proper method of identifying those 6 2013 Annual Admin Code Supp, R 792.10247. … As the Frolings’ own experts acknowledged, Burton’s experience and expertise qualified him to provide an opinion regarding the estimated cost of implementing the plan he designed.

Amelia Quelas v. Daimler Trucks North America LLC

Michigan Court of Appeals · Mar 21, 2017

Chrysler Corp explicitly rejected the framework utilized in these prior cases and established the Restatement’s framework as controlling in this state. … The court simply stated that it would consider whether the experts were qualified on the basis of the testimony to be adduced at the hearing, not as a preliminary matter.

People of Michigan v. Anthony Terrel Wilson

Michigan Court of Appeals · Jun 27, 2024

Given this, the circumstances do not clearly indicate the trustworthiness of the statement. 5. … All three of these offenses qualify as crimes against a person. MCL 777.12e, MCL 777.12f, and MCL 777.16p.

In Re Esther G Bennett Revocable Trust

Michigan Court of Appeals · Jun 30, 2022

Zimmerman sent a letter to plaintiffs indicating that Esther appointed him trustee of the “Bennett Family Trust Established on May 12, 2014.” … The probate court ruled that the ongoing discovery violations were clearly willful and intentional.