Case law

Tamiko Colts v. Progressive Marathon Insurance Company

Michigan Court of Appeals · Mar 11, 2021

Specifically, Colts argues that the statements by the unknown motorist were “hearsay and no foundational evidence existed for the trial court to qualify” the statements as present sense impressions or excited utterances. … The jury was able to view photographs of the damage to Brant’s trailer and to Colts’s minivan, and the jury clearly found the testimony of Brant to be credible given that it returned a verdict in defendants’ favor.

Sarah Zeller v. Grand Trunk Western Railroad Company

Michigan Court of Appeals · Nov 19, 2020

However, lapses in memories do not establish a lack of personal knowledge to support a claim. … However, there is no evidence that the CN Police lacked proper training to qualify as commissioned law enforcement officers as set forth in MCL 462.367(2).

William Bristol Md v. Hisham Dado Md

Michigan Court of Appeals · Mar 24, 2015

The motion may be granted only where the claims are “ ‘so clearly unenforceable as a matter of law that no factual development could possibly justify recovery.’ ” Id., quoting Wade v Dep’t of Corrections, 439 Mich 158, 163 … If the moving party meets its burden, the burden then shifts to the opposing party to establish that a genuine issue of disputed fact exists. Id.

People of Michigan v. Jonathan David Hewitt-El

Michigan Court of Appeals · May 8, 2018

Factual findings are clearly erroneous if the reviewing court, upon review of the entire record, “is left with a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made.” … We conclude that these findings are clearly erroneous.

People of Michigan v. Jonathan David Hewitt-El

Michigan Court of Appeals · May 8, 2018

Factual findings are clearly erroneous if the reviewing court, upon review of the entire record, “is left with a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made.” … We conclude that these findings are clearly erroneous.

Citimortgage Inc v. Kevin Casey

Michigan Court of Appeals · Nov 9, 2017

In 2012, CitiMortgage filed an action seeking reformation of the mortgage to establish Burgess as a mortgagor. … These findings are not clearly erroneous.

People of Michigan v. Lee Thomas Large

Michigan Court of Appeals · Aug 11, 2022

The prosecution bears the burden of establishing the amount of restitution by a preponderance of the evidence. … Further, the district court clearly erred by finding that the fair market value of the home could not be determined because there was sufficient evidence presented to establish the fair market value of the home at the time

Citimortgage Inc v. Kevin Casey

Michigan Court of Appeals · Nov 9, 2017

In 2012, CitiMortgage filed an action seeking reformation of the mortgage to establish Burgess as a mortgagor. … These findings are not clearly erroneous.

People of Michigan v. Aubrey Jiles Stanley Jr

Michigan Court of Appeals · Jul 29, 2021

Consequently, Arthur has failed to establish plain error. … A finding is clearly erroneous if this Court “is left with a definite and firm conviction that the trial court made a mistake.”

People of Michigan v. William Albert Hall

Michigan Court of Appeals · Dec 21, 2023

In this case, the child qualified as a “ ‘witness’ ” under MCL 600.2163a because she was 14 years old at the time of the trial, see MCL 600.2163a(1)(g)(i). … Furthermore, although the defense lawyer also stated that he did not “fault” the prosecution for the lack of physical evidence, he clearly did so to focus the jury’s attention on the child’s credibility.

Regina M Bergh v. Carl E Bergh

Michigan Court of Appeals · Oct 13, 2016

A finding of fact “is clearly erroneous if, after a review of the entire record, the reviewing court is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake was made.” Id. … Rehabilitative spousal support is intended to allow a party to assimilate into the work force and establish economic self-sufficiency. See Friend v Friend, 486 Mich 1035; 783 NW2d 122 (2010).

People of Michigan v. Jeremy Abston

Michigan Court of Appeals · Jul 26, 2018

Counsel’s agreement that the prosecution established Abston as a fourth-offense habitual offender waived this claim. … Therefore, a trial court may assess 10 points for OV 3 without establishing that treatment was actually received.

Stephanie Britt v. McLaren Flint

Michigan Court of Appeals · Jul 23, 2020

whether they were made by a decision maker or an agent within the scope of his employment, (2) whether they were related to the decision-making process, (3) whether they were vague and ambiguous or clearly … To establish a prima facie case of discrimination, plaintiff must show that (1) she was a member of the protected class; (2) she suffered an adverse employment action, such as discharge; (3) she was qualified for the position

People of Michigan v. Jeremy Abston

Michigan Court of Appeals · Jul 26, 2018

Counsel’s agreement that the prosecution established Abston as a fourth-offense habitual offender waived this claim. … Therefore, a trial court may assess 10 points for OV 3 without establishing that treatment was actually received.

Angerica L Downer v. USA Underwriters

Michigan Court of Appeals · May 30, 2024

and Financial Services (DIFS) stated that carriers are required to provide a PIP selection form “at the time of new business,” but concluded that the DIFS guidelines were not binding and that DIFS’s interpretation was “ ‘clearly … However, USA did not properly establish the presumption. On remand, if USA establishes a rebuttable presumption, the trial court should address the issue as described in Bronson Health Care.

Richard a Krueger v. Spectrum Health Systems

Michigan Court of Appeals · Sep 27, 2016

To the extent that they had not clearly articulated this allegation in their complaint, plaintiffs requested leave to amend the complaint. … This Court discussed at length the establishment of an accrual date for medical malpractice claims in Kincaid, 300 Mich App at 524-531.

Levert Lyons v. Scott C Kinsel

Michigan Court of Appeals · Apr 25, 2017

“[U]pon [the] defendant’s representations that he was fully qualified and competent to represent [the] plaintiff in the Courts of Kentucky in such action, [the plaintiff] retained [the] defendant for such purpose.” Id. … Because the parties clearly do not share residency, business, or a registered office in Wayne County, MCL 600.1629(1)(c) cannot establish venue. Subsequently, this Court must look to MCL 600.1629(1)(d) for guidance.

People of Michigan v. Curtis Conway Bailey

Michigan Court of Appeals · Oct 21, 2014

The video recording of the complainant’s June 8, 2010, forensic interview was played for the jury wherein the complainant clearly explained that defendant “stuck” his fingers inside her and moved his fingers “up and down. … Therefore, defendant has failed to establish that, but for trial counsel’s failure to object, the outcome of his trial would have been different.

Dennis Uppleger v. McLaren Port Huron

Michigan Court of Appeals · Oct 22, 2020

Uppleger despite repeated calls and updates from the hospital, this case would clearly go to a jury on that valid question. … Anyway, for the same reasons that plaintiffs cannot establish factual causation, they also cannot establish legal causation.

People of Michigan v. Leon Leroy Plotts

Michigan Court of Appeals · Aug 11, 2015

“To establish prejudice, he must show a reasonable probability that the outcome would have been different but for counsel’s errors.” Id. … On this record, the trial court did not clearly err in finding that defense counsel was not ineffective for failing to hire Vanderbeck.