Case law

in Re Leon E Barrenger Trust

Michigan Court of Appeals · May 11, 2017

Indeed, three of the four are clearly personal letters, and in no way legal documents. … But, Michigan law is clear in this regard: “It is a well- established rule of statutory construction that this Court will not read words into a statute.” Byker v Mannes, 465 Mich 637, 646-647; 641 NW2d 210 (2002).

People of Michigan v. Gerran Dashawn McLaurin

Michigan Court of Appeals · Jul 7, 2016

The parties do not dispute that carjacking qualifies as a class A offense, MCL 777.16y, subject to the sentencing grid that appears in MCL 777.62. … [unless] an independent basis for in-court identification can be established” that qualifies as “untainted by the suggestive pretrial procedure.” Id. at 303 (citation and quotation marks omitted).

Shannon N Knight v. Johnny Lamar Green

Michigan Court of Appeals · Oct 19, 2023

Expert-witness fees qualify as “actual costs” under MCR 2.403(O). [Citations omitted.] Defendants argue that the trial court’s award of expert witness fees included an unreasonable hourly rate. … Kapsokavathis clearly states that he charged $8,000 for a half day trial appearance.

People of Michigan v. Donna Kay Scrivo

Michigan Court of Appeals · Jun 20, 2017

This initial questioning was, therefore, clearly improper. … However, in this case, evidence of defendant’s guilt was clearly overwhelming.

People of Michigan v. Rodrick Devonte Williams

Michigan Court of Appeals · Oct 6, 2022

However, even if an affidavit is not necessary, appellate counsel’s unsworn statement does not qualify as a competent “offer of proof.” … In this case, defendant cannot establish any error, plain or otherwise.

Mark Alan Miller v. Michigan State Police

Michigan Court of Appeals · Jul 18, 2017

The plain language of the statute mandates that in order for a physical or mental condition to qualify as a disability for purposes of the PWDCRA, it must substantially limit a major life activity.14 “To determine whether … Forsberg’s evaluation clearly demonstrates that it perceived Miller as suffering from a mental instability. Nonetheless, Miller’s perceived disability claim must fail for other reasons.

People of Michigan v. Jacques Earl Carpenter

Michigan Court of Appeals · Oct 15, 2015

To establish ineffective assistance of counsel a defendant must establish that counsel’s performance was deficient as measured against objective reasonableness under the circumstances according to prevailing professional … Similarly, MCL 600.1337 states that “[w]hen the court finds that a person in attendance at court as a juror is not qualified to serve as a juror, or is exempt and claims an exemption, the court shall discharge him or her

Lasan Bellamy v. Department of Corrections

Michigan Court of Appeals · Mar 20, 2018

The Parole Board has authority to grant parole to qualified inmates. In re Parole of Bivings, 242 Mich App 363, 372; 619 NW2d 163 (2000). … When statutory language is unambiguous, it is presumed that the Legislature’s intent is clearly expressed and no further judicial construction is required or permitted. Id.

People of Michigan v. Donna Kay Scrivo

Michigan Court of Appeals · Jun 20, 2017

This initial questioning was, therefore, clearly improper. … However, in this case, evidence of defendant’s guilt was clearly overwhelming.

Lasan Bellamy v. Department of Corrections

Michigan Court of Appeals · Mar 20, 2018

The Parole Board has authority to grant parole to qualified inmates. In re Parole of Bivings, 242 Mich App 363, 372; 619 NW2d 163 (2000). … When statutory language is unambiguous, it is presumed that the Legislature’s intent is clearly expressed and no further judicial construction is required or permitted. Id.

People of Michigan v. Devon Allen Cooper

Michigan Court of Appeals · Sep 14, 2017

He therefore has not established prejudice. … Defendant objected to Hamilton’s testimony on grounds that Hamilton was not qualified as a “gang expert.”

People of Michigan v. Devon Allen Cooper

Michigan Court of Appeals · Sep 14, 2017

He therefore has not established prejudice. … Defendant objected to Hamilton’s testimony on grounds that Hamilton was not qualified as a “gang expert.”

People of Michigan v. Brent Alan Owings

Michigan Court of Appeals · Mar 14, 2019

In sum, defendant has not established plain error because the prosecutor was not prohibited from asking leading questions. … We are not persuaded that the challenged testimony was clearly outside the scope of her expertise.

State Farm Fire and Casualty Company v. Detroit Edison Company

Michigan Court of Appeals · May 22, 2018

Plainly read, MRE 702 establishes a three-part test for the admissibility of expert testimony. First, the expert must be qualified. Craig ex rel Craig v Oakwood Hosp, 471 Mich 67, 78; 684 NW2d 296 (2004). … “A finding is clearly erroneous when this Court is left with a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made.” Id. (quotation marks and citation omitted).

in Re J J Guido-Seger Minor

Michigan Court of Appeals · Feb 7, 2017

A finding is clearly erroneous if the reviewing court is left with a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made. … Under these circumstances, the trial court’s decision that termination was in the child’s best interests was not clearly erroneous.

People of Michigan v. Earvin Jamil Parchman

Michigan Court of Appeals · Mar 24, 2020

He ordered the victim not to call the police. 1 A Bridge card issued by the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services enables a qualified recipient to purchase certain food items and to access cash benefits. … When a sentencing court chooses to disregard the challenged information, it must clearly indicate that it did not consider the challenged information in determining the sentence. Id.

in Re J J Guido-Seger Minor

Michigan Court of Appeals · Feb 7, 2017

A finding is clearly erroneous if the reviewing court is left with a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made. … Under these circumstances, the trial court’s decision that termination was in the child’s best interests was not clearly erroneous.

D Ellen M Andary v. Usaa Casualty Insurance Company

Michigan Court of Appeals · Aug 25, 2022

A statute is presumed to apply prospectively only unless the Legislature clearly manifested an intent that the statute apply retroactively. … If a substantial impairment of a contractual relationship is established, the second prong requires examination whether legislative disruption of the contractual relationship was necessary for the public good, i.e., was the

People Of Mi V Johnny Wayne Davis

Michigan Court of Appeals · Apr 21, 2022

This Court has held that an offender’s bare hands do not qualify as a potentially lethal weapon under MCL 777.32(1)(e). See People v Hutcheson, 308 Mich App 10, 17; 865 NW2d 44 (2014). … This Court held in its previous opinion that sufficient evidence was presented at trial to support defendant’s convictions, stating: The evidence clearly established that Armstead committed each of the

State Farm Fire and Casualty Company v. Detroit Edison Company

Michigan Court of Appeals · May 22, 2018

Plainly read, MRE 702 establishes a three-part test for the admissibility of expert testimony. First, the expert must be qualified. Craig ex rel Craig v Oakwood Hosp, 471 Mich 67, 78; 684 NW2d 296 (2004). … “A finding is clearly erroneous when this Court is left with a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made.” Id. (quotation marks and citation omitted).