Case law

People v. Terrell

289 Mich. App. 553 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Aug 26, 2010

Hudson had the right to assert his Fifth Amendment right and therefore denied the defendant Terrell his testimony, which clearly lent to the fact that Mr. … Accordingly, we hold that defendant has failed to establish the first element in the four-part test set forth by our Supreme Court in Cress to determine whether a new trial is warranted on the basis of newly discovered evidence

Kuhn v. Department of Treasury

15 Mich. App. 364 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Aug 5, 1969

The provisions of the income tax act declaring that the act is “necessary to meet established deficiencies, present and future, in State funds” 10 and that the act shall not take effect unless the estimated revenues to be … A flat rate income tax is clearly permitted and could, in the opinion of the committee, be imposed on a ‘piggyback’ basis on income computed for Federal tax purposes.

Mallory v. Conida Warehouses, Inc.

113 Mich. App. 280 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Feb 17, 1982

Long-arm jurisdiction over nonresident tortfeasors is established in Michigan under four statutes. … While it is true that in Sifers v Horen, 385 Mich 195 ; 188 NW2d 623 (1971), the Court did indicate that the Legislature intended full expansion of long-arm jurisdiction, Sifers was a case that clearly involved an individual

Dubey v. Stroh Brewery Co.

185 Mich. App. 561 · Michigan Court of Appeals · May 30, 1990

We hold that, by employing the more comprehensive and orderly approach of McDonnell Douglas, the trial court clearly considered whether genuine issues of material fact existed to show that plaintiff’s age was a determining … It is clear that plaintiff has presented evidence sufficient to establish as a genuine material fact that he was as qualified as Mr. Sheehy.

Terry v. City of Detroit

226 Mich. App. 418 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Feb 10, 1998

eighty-four miles an hour, the driving in a residential area, the expert testimony with regard to the obligation of an officer to consider discontinuing the chase under these circumstances, all of these are facts that should clearly … In order to establish a prima facie case of negligence, the plaintiff must prove: “(1) that the defendant owed a duty to the plaintiff; (2) that the defendant breached that duty; (3) that the defendant’s breach of duty was

Tim Edward Brugger II v. Midland County Bd of Road Commissioners

Michigan Court of Appeals · May 15, 2018

established a new principle of law. … establish a new principle of law in 2016; the only new principles of law were established by Rowland in 2007, and Streng simply resolved the ensuing conflict between two statutes—MCL 224.21 and the GTLA notice provision—in

Lockaby v. Wayne County

63 Mich. App. 185 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Aug 12, 1975

On appeal, plaintiff argues that his complaint stated a cause of action coming within the public buildings exception of the statutory provisions establishing governmental immunity, MCLA 691.1406; MSA 3.996(106), and that … Lastly, while conceding that the question has been decided by this Court, plaintiff contends that the statute establishing governmental immunity, MCLA 691.1407; MSA 3.996(107) is unconstitutional.

Trezzi v. City of Detroit

120 Mich. App. 506 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Oct 18, 1982

By creating the 911 system, all the city has done is establish a new bureaucracy (without any negative connotations intended), separating the citizenry from the police, a bureaucracy which may be helpful, but is ultimately … Further, McCann clearly sets limits that the conduct must be without and not within the scope of the exercise and discharge of a governmental function." 406 Mich 82 -83. [1] In this appeal, we are not dealing with a citizen's

People v. Howe

200 Mich. App. 221 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Jun 21, 1993

Chase qualifies as an independent evaluator for purposes of MCL 768.20a; MSA 28.1043(1). … Secondly, the common-law attorney-client privilege is not immune from development by case law or modification by statute.

People v. Tinskey

49 Mich. App. 497 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Sep 25, 1973

Swidler was not in a condition to be aborted in no way negates their clearly manifested intent to commit a criminal act. … Secondly, defendants claim that the record clearly demonstrates that the conspiracy in the instant case was generated by police agents, and that the defense of entrapment had therefore been established as a matter of law.

Southfield Educ. Ass'n v. Bd. of Educ. of the Southfield Pub. Sch.

320 Mich. App. 353 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Jul 11, 2017

Plaintiffs presented documentary evidence that Smith was certified and qualified for the Birney position. … With respect to layoffs, it has long been established under Michigan law that a tenured teacher is not given any protection of his or her employment from a bona fide reduction in personnel.

Kelly-Nevils v. Detroit Receiving Hospital

207 Mich. App. 410 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Nov 7, 1994

The circuit court subsequently held that defendant was immune by virtue of the good-faith exception established in the uaga and granted summary disposition. … The Act does not compel organ donations nor does it establish a presumption that organs will be donated.

Dybata v. Kistler

140 Mich. App. 65 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Jan 2, 1985

However, his statement does not establish that he has any direct knowledge regarding proceedings of a general practitioner. *70 "Furthermore, Dr. … We cannot say on this record that the trial court findings were clearly erroneous, GCR 1963, 517.1, or that the trial court abused its discretion in finding that Dr.

People v. Catanzarite

211 Mich. App. 573 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Jun 23, 1995

Furthermore, we disagree with defendant that the prior conviction establishes Spikes’ knowledge of the cocaine. … A prosecutor has no duty to grant a witness immunity so that the witness can testify for a defendant, and a defendant cannot compel a grant of immunity. People v Lawton, 196 Mich App 341, 346 ; 492 NW2d 810 (1992).

Rosa Holliday v. Board of State Canvassers

Michigan Court of Appeals · Aug 30, 2024

petition, a person filing a qualifying petition, and an officer receiving a qualifying petition … On the other hand, by setting forth certain specific requirements applicable to out-of-state circulators, MCL 168.544c(3) clearly acknowledges that circulators of qualifying petitions like those at issue here need not be

Stott v. Wayne County

224 Mich. App. 422 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Oct 8, 1997

Summary disposition for failure to state a claim should be upheld only when the claim is so clearly unenforceable as a matter of law that no factual development could establish the claim and thus justify recovery. Id. … The Supreme Court found that the fireman’s rule barred his suit against the City of Warren because Officer Woods’ injury “clearly stems from the performance of a fundamental police function.

Janet Lashar Eppel v. Christopher James Eppel

322 Mich. App. 562 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Jan 9, 2018

Any such error must be readily apparent on the face of the award without second-guessing the arbitrator’s thought processes, and the arbitrator’s findings of fact are immune to review altogether. … Clearly, attorney fees were placed before the arbitrator. Equally clearly, at least based on the available record, attorney fees based on need were not, or at least they were not specifically argued.

Marquette County v. Board of Control of Northern Michigan University

111 Mich. App. 521 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Nov 30, 1981

Clearly if the Legislature had intended to exclude them, it could have said so; for example, see § 8(4). … In effect, the Court established another principle of statutory construction which supports defendant in the present case: if one act establishes a state agency’s exclusive jurisdiction over certain subject matter and a second

Petra Pike v. Northern Michigan University

Michigan Court of Appeals · Apr 25, 2019

Further, as clearly stated in MCL 600.6419(7), the Court of Claims had jurisdiction over Bosma who was an employee of the state. … This Court reviews de novo a trial court’s grant of summary disposition, as well as the “applicability of governmental immunity and the statutory exceptions to immunity . . . .”

Eldenbrady v. City of Albion

294 Mich. App. 251 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Oct 4, 2011

Exemptions are never presumed, the burden is on a claimant to establish clearly his right to exemption, and an alleged grant of exemption will be strictly construed and cannot be made out by inference or implication but must … In order to qualify for a principal residence exemption under the third sentence of MCL 211.7dd(c), property need only be “unoccupied” — not “vacant.”