Case law

Willis v. Ed Hudson Towing, Inc

109 Mich. App. 344 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Sep 9, 1981

Contingent upon this factual determination which is not clearly erroneous, we affirm the legal conclusion that defendant wrrongfully converted plaintiff’s automobile. … The measure of damages for the conversion of personal property is the value of the property at the time of the conversion, in the absence of any testimony establishing a peculiar value in the goods to the owner.

Karam v. Law Offices of Ralph J Kliber

253 Mich. App. 410 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Jan 9, 2003

This first amendment changed the terms of the marital trust by adding a Qualified Terminable Interest Property (qtip) provision pursuant to 26 USC 2056(b)(7), 4 but did not change the nature of the controversial “equalization … Summary disposition is proper where the claim “is so clearly unenforceable as a matter of law that no factual development could possibly justify recovery.” Id.

Doe v. Young Marines of Marine Corps League

277 Mich. App. 391 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Feb 28, 2008

The Legislature has clearly and unambiguously expressed that private clubs do not come within the public accommodations provisions of the Civil Rights Act unless the private club falls within one of the clearly expressed … The district court therefore determined that MHSAA qualifies as providing a “public service” under Michigan law.

Estate of Brian a Brennan-Baker v. Chippewa Cnty War Memorial Hosp

Michigan Court of Appeals · Oct 16, 2014

Hiawatha argued it was entitled to immunity because plaintiffs failed to demonstrate that any of the statutory exceptions to immunity applied to the facts of this case. … Here, because plaintiffs failed to present evidence to establish causation, it would be futile to give plaintiffs an opportunity to amend the pleadings to more clearly state their claim against the clerk.

People v. Yeo

103 Mich. App. 418 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Feb 3, 1981

Clearly, there are no exceptional equities favoring defendant in the case at bar save the mere passage of time. … Under the above analysis, we conclude that an improper foundation was established for admission of the disputed evidence.

People v. Nieves

92 Mich. App. 613 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Oct 1, 1979

The principal witness for the prosecution was Amanda Everett, defendant’s girlfriend, who was granted immunity in return for her testimony. … Thus, defendant’s intent was clearly material to the determination of guilt. However, this does not end our analysis.

In Re Kv Minor

Michigan Court of Appeals · Sep 8, 2025

Although this established jurisdiction over KV, it did not clearly resolve whether aggravated circumstances existed to justify immediate termination. … To establish jurisdiction, DHHS must prove one of the bases set forth in MCL 712A.2(b).

In re MGR

323 Mich. App. 279 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Feb 27, 2018

To qualify as a "do something" father, a putative father must demonstrate that he has either (1) established a custodial relationship with the child or (2) provided substantial and regular support or care, within his ability … The trial court's opinion clearly contains numerous factual and legal errors.

Michigan United Conservation Clubs v. Lansing Township

129 Mich. App. 1 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Sep 26, 1983

establish, beyond reasonable doubt, his right thereto. … 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

Burrows v. bidigare/bublys, Inc

158 Mich. App. 175 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Jan 7, 1987

The contract could not be performed except by the personal services of pro *184 fessionally qualified individuals. … The decision of the arbitrator was consistent with a finding that the proofs presented at arbitration established that the contract was performed defectively, but did not establish which, if either, of the individual defendants

People v. Callon

256 Mich. App. 312 · Michigan Court of Appeals · May 29, 2003

The trial court did not clearly err by ruling that the statute had not been violated. Jenne, supra at 521 . … The record here fails to establish any unfair prejudice to the defense.

Tobin v. Providence Hospital

244 Mich. App. 626 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Apr 5, 2001

proofs to establish the elements of the cause of action. ...” … Young would be qualified to present standard of care testimony.

Gregg D Stoll v. Luce MacKinac Alger Schoolcraft Dist Health Dept

Michigan Court of Appeals · Oct 21, 2014

Plaintiff also argues that Derusha is not entitled to immunity in that he was not qualified for the position he held because he lacked a graduate degree in public health. … However, MCL 691.1407(5) clearly indicates that the highest executive official is entitled to immunity and makes no indication that the qualifications of the official should be considered.

Turbin v. GRAESSER

214 Mich. App. 215 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Nov 3, 1995

A panel of this Court previously affirmed the trial court's determination that plaintiffs' proposed expert witness was not qualified to testify because plaintiffs could not establish that the expert was familiar with the … Peter Macaluso, possesses outstanding credentials and he is clearly qualified to testify regarding the subject of addiction medicine. However, a trial court may not base its decision to allow Dr.

People v. Smyers

47 Mich. App. 61 · Michigan Court of Appeals · May 22, 1973

People v Larco, 331 Mich 420, 426-427 (1951), the Supreme Court approvingly cited the cogent language of Justice Christianity in People v McKinney, 10 Mich 54, 95 (1862): "As a general rule, in cases of felony, when it clearly … The people contend that defendant Smyers sought to profit from his participation in the conspiracy in three ways: "1, that as an informer he would immunize — I’m not reading that right — that as an informer, he would be immunized

People of Michigan v. John MacAuley Burkman

Michigan Court of Appeals · Jun 2, 2022

The term “menace” as defined in the dictionary does not require an accompanying physical component, but may be established through a threat. … The Court concluded that freedom of speech did not “extend[] its immunity to speech or writing used as an integral part of conduct in violation of a valid criminal statute.” Id.

Pomranky v. Zack Co.

159 Mich. App. 338 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Apr 20, 1987

The findings of fact made by the trial judge were supported by the evidence and were not clearly erroneous. We disagree, however, with the court’s legal conclusions. … "An initial prima facie case of discrimination is established when the plaintiff proves by a preponderance of the evidence that [s]he applied for *344 an available position for which [s]he was qualified but was rejected under

Judith Angeloff v. City of Royal Oak

Michigan Court of Appeals · Dec 29, 2015

established that the pavement on which Angeloff fell was a sidewalk under MCL 691.1401(f). … , and, therefore, that exception to its immunity does not apply.

People of Michigan v. Alenna Marie Rocafort

Michigan Court of Appeals · Jan 2, 2018

In this case, defendant may establish immunity under § 4 if she produces a preponderance of the evidence showing that at the time of the charged offenses she (i) possessed a valid registry identification card, … In other words, the language establishing limited immunity in § 4 of the MMMA expressly conditions that immunity on the person possessing no amount of marijuana that does not qualify as usable marijuana

Midwest Power Line Inc v. Department of Treasury

Michigan Court of Appeals · May 22, 2018

property affixed to or to be affixed to and directly used in the operation of either a qualified truck or a trailer designed to be drawn behind a qualified truck. … The fact that petitioner haul’s customers’ property across state lines is not, by itself, sufficient to establish that it is an “interstate fleet motor carrier.”