Case law

Karen Hrapkiewicz v. Board of Governors of Wayne State University

Michigan Court of Appeals · Mar 9, 2017

; (3) she was qualified for the position; and (4) she was replaced by a younger person. … Thus, she clearly qualifies as a prevailing party, and thus the trial court had discretion to grant her costs and attorney fees.

People of Michigan v. Luster Pernell Burns Jr

Michigan Court of Appeals · Aug 19, 2021

The court’s finding in that regard is not clearly erroneous. The prosecutor asserted that she did not intend to elicit improper testimony. … “It is a well-established rule that a jury may convict on the uncorroborated evidence of a CSC victim.” People v Lemmon, 456 Mich 625, 642-643 n 22; 576 NW2d 129 (1998); MCL 750.520h.

People of Michigan v. James Craig Baker

Michigan Court of Appeals · Feb 14, 2019

After Baker’s arrest on a qualifying misdemeanor charge, the board had to suspend his license to carry a concealed weapon at least until the final disposition of his charges. See MCL 28.428(3). … The search warrant also clearly identified the electronic devices to be searched: the devices found on Baker and Vreeland after the confrontation in the lobby, and the devices found in Vreeland’s car under the authority of

In Re Eden Minors

Michigan Court of Appeals · Feb 17, 2022

The emergency hearing on November 8, 2019 would appear to qualify for that exemption, for the reasons discussed. … A trial court must terminate a parent’s parental rights if it finds that a statutory ground under MCL 712A.19b(3) has been established by clear and convincing evidence and that termination is in the child’s best interests

in Re messer/sawyer Minors

Michigan Court of Appeals · Aug 16, 2018

The record established that MS sustained several severe physical injuries over the course of several months while in respondent-mother’s care. … Yet, respondent has not established what expert could have been called or what testimony could have been provided.

Abram Andrews v. County of Wayne

Michigan Court of Appeals · Mar 6, 2018

Plaintiffs’ count six for alleged breach of repayment agreements does not qualify; such an action does not fall under the category of a claim that the taxpayer did not receive proper notice under the GPTA. … See -5- Workers’ Compensation Agency Director v MacDonald’s Indus Products, Inc, 305 Mich App 460, 474; 853 NW2d 467 (2014) (“It is well established in Michigan that, assuming

Michele Artis v. Department of Corrections

Michigan Court of Appeals · Sep 12, 2017

Plaintiff claims that the trial court erred in finding her claim untimely because she adequately established a prima facie case of a willful FMLA violation. We do not agree. … Plaintiff also relies on Rodriguez v Ford Motor Co, 382 F Supp 2d 928, 936-937 (ED Mich, 2005), but Rodriguez is clearly distinguishable from the present case.

Sl Town Center Realty LLC v. Midwest Veterinary Partners LLC

Michigan Court of Appeals · Jul 27, 2023

As can be seen from its language, Article 31 begins by establishing that the proposed lease agreement must be construed as an offer from defendant to plaintiffs. … As this Court has clearly stated, “ ‘[u]nless an acceptance is unambiguous and in strict conformance with the offer, no contract is formed.’ ” Clark, 309 Mich App at 394, quoting Kloian, 273 Mich App at 452 (emphasis added

in Re X Sorrells Minor

Michigan Court of Appeals · May 7, 2019

Jurisdiction is established pursuant to MCL 712A.2(b). … Furthermore, even if structural error might have occurred, the deprivation of the right to counsel is not absolutely immune to a harmless-error analysis.

Estate of Harishkumar Patel v. Reinalt-Thomas Corporation

Michigan Court of Appeals · Oct 25, 2018

“Not only must the plaintiff qualify his or her expert, he or she must also show that the actual expert testimony offered is based on the factual predicate knowledge required of the expert under MRE 703, which governs the … The jury clearly answered both questions in the affirmative. 4.

In Re Eden Minors

Michigan Court of Appeals · Feb 17, 2022

The emergency hearing on November 8, 2019 would appear to qualify for that exemption, for the reasons discussed. … A trial court must terminate a parent’s parental rights if it finds that a statutory ground under MCL 712A.19b(3) has been established by clear and convincing evidence and that termination is in the child’s best interests

Hassan M Ahmad v. University of Michigan

Michigan Court of Appeals · Jun 20, 2019

A motion under MCR 2.116(C)(8) may be granted only where the claims are so clearly unenforceable as a matter of law that no factual development could possibly justify recovery.” … In making this argument, the University says that in order to qualify as a “public record” for FOIA purposes, all three aspects of the bylaws’ stated purpose are required to have been accomplished.

Power Play International Inc v. Del Reddy

Michigan Court of Appeals · Jul 26, 2016

Clearly, there would be no reason to destroy defendants’ personal property and provide plaintiffs with invoices indicating such if the property did not depict, relate, or pertain to plaintiffs or the Howe family. … Where the fact of damages has been established and the only question to be decided is the amount, the certainty requirement is relaxed. Id.

In Re hall/anderson Minors

Michigan Court of Appeals · Sep 1, 2022

The case worker testified about her knowledge of the allegations, which included testimony that respondent-father admitted many of the allegations to her with some qualifying statements. … Respondent-mother also argues that the trial court clearly erred when it found that termination was in the children’s best interests.

Michele Artis v. Department of Corrections

Michigan Court of Appeals · Sep 12, 2017

Plaintiff claims that the trial court erred in finding her claim untimely because she adequately established a prima facie case of a willful FMLA violation. We do not agree. … Plaintiff also relies on Rodriguez v Ford Motor Co, 382 F Supp 2d 928, 936-937 (ED Mich, 2005), but Rodriguez is clearly distinguishable from the present case.

Lonetta Nicole Silas v. Secura Insurance Companies

Michigan Court of Appeals · Oct 10, 2017

Here, too, counsel clearly and unabashedly suggested that the jury should conclude that Secura was a racist company. … Slabey-Klar’s testimony would have left any medical opinions properly in the hands of medical professionals who were qualified to give such testimony.

In Re Martino Estate

Michigan Court of Appeals · Jul 11, 2025

Beulah Hoagland Appleton Qualified Personal Residence Trust v Emmet Co Rd Comm’n, 236 Mich App 546, 550; 600 NW2d 698 (1999). … or affirmative conduct establishing mutual agreement to modify or waive the particular original contract.”

Vernisha Key v. Stonemor Michigan LLC

Michigan Court of Appeals · Nov 9, 2021

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. … We will not address those cases here because Michigan cases that we are bound to follow have already established the elements for interference with the right of burial.

People of Michigan v. Felix Antonio Davis III

Michigan Court of Appeals · May 14, 2020

The record must additionally establish that the defendant exploited the victim’s vulnerability. … The letters were relevant because they were clearly intended to prevent the prosecution from prosecuting defendant, and were probative of defendant’s consciousness of guilt.

Marcia Marie McFarlane v. Dale Donald McFarlane

Michigan Court of Appeals · Feb 21, 2017

“[W]here a trial court's valuation of a marital asset is within the range established by the proofs, no clear error is present.” … Contrary to plaintiff’s arguments, it was not necessary for Griffith to be qualified as an expert in order to testify about the home’s value.