Case law

Estate of Bernadine Alli v. William Beaumont Hospital

Michigan Court of Appeals · Nov 19, 2025

The plaintiff had argued that in order to qualify for immunity under the PHCIA, the healthcare provided must have been provided specifically to support the state’s response to the pandemic and not care provided in the ordinary … The alleged acts, omissions, and injuries were wholly unrelated to the pandemic, so deeming defendant immune would contravene the Legislature’s clearly- communicated intent to limit this immunization to services

Syrowik v. City of Detroit

119 Mich. App. 343 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Sep 7, 1982

Shortly thereafter, defendants moved for summary judgment alleging immunity from liability for negligence under the recreational land users act, supra. … Both of these documents were prepared in 1956, before Derby Hill was constructed, and plaintiffs were unable to establish the proper foundation for the admission of these documents.

CVS Caremark v. State Tax Commission

306 Mich. App. 58 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Jul 1, 2014

We conclude that the review procedure in MCL 211.34c(6) does not qualify as a hearing in the constitutional sense. … Where the language is unambiguous, we presume that the Legislature intended the meaning clearly expressed — no further judicial construction is required or permitted, and the statute must be enforced as written.

Magid v. Oak Park Racquet Club Associates, Ltd.

84 Mich. App. 522 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Jul 6, 1978

Applying Riegler to the case at bar, 3 we hold that § 147 qualifies the broad language of § 146 for purposes of a civil cause of action. … We hold that the trial court’s "findings” as to the propriety of plaintiffs’ class action were clearly erroneous. 7 They were not supported by facts of record.

Kaiser Optical Systems, Inc v. Department of Treasury

254 Mich. App. 517 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Mar 7, 2003

The parties do not dispute that California has a form of business tax that would qualify under MCL 208.42. … This exception appears to be aimed at barring a taxpayer from establishing a nexus with another state simply by retaining legal counsel or an accountant in that state. That clearly is not the situation in this case.

Tallman v. Cheboygan Area Schools

183 Mich. App. 123 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Apr 2, 1990

The court concluded that the adoption of this policy by the school board qualified as an act under subsection 4 of § 4 of the foia. MCL 15.234(4); MSA 4.1801(4)(4). … The foia clearly provides a method for determining the charge for records.

Ray v. Transamerica Insurance

46 Mich. App. 647 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Apr 26, 1973

We concluded there that a compensation carrier is not immune from common-law tort liability for its own acts of negligence causing injury to the employee and that the compensation insurance carrier may be a third-party tortfeasor … It is clear to us that the jury found a duty existed on the part of the defendant, that duty extended to the plaintiff because the plaintiff was clearly within the orbit of risk created by the negligent performance of the

Chiles v. Machine Shop, Inc

238 Mich. App. 462 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Feb 23, 2000

The scope of the act clearly encompasses actions taken by an employer before an employment relationship even exists, e.g., discriminatorily refusing to hire an applicant on account of a disability. … This inclusion of common ailments and injuries would mean that nearly everyone would qualify as “disabled” at some time during their life.

Friedman v. Farmington Township School District

40 Mich. App. 197 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Apr 26, 1972

And in Washburn v Lucas, 373 Mich 610, 621 (1964) Justice Souris spoke for the majority in saying: "Moreover, we would go further, and commit this Court anew to the established rule that opinions of causation in negligence … Such arbitrary treatment clearly violates the equal protection guarantees of our state and Federal Constitutions. The notice provision is void and of no effect.”

People v. Canter

197 Mich. App. 550 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Dec 21, 1992

Contrary to defendant’s contentions, neither the veracity of Payton’s recanting testimony nor the falsity of her trial testimony has clearly been established. Recanting testimony is suspect and untrustworthy. … Such a finding is permissible only if supported by evidence establishing guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Michigan Roofing & Sheet Metal, Inc v. Dufty Road Properties

90 Mich. App. 732 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Jun 19, 1979

If the facts clearly indicate that the contractor has 'substantially’ complied with the statute and that such compliance has afforded to the obligor the protection contemplated by the statute, we have rejected the obligor … Also, there is no indication in the record that the reason for the 13-day period was because Casey was not qualified to obtain a license.

Evans v. Department of Social Services

22 Mich. App. 633 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Mar 25, 1970

amount of assistance.” 23 Clearly, the purpose of this requirement is to avoid payment of Federal ADC funds to individuals who, because of changing family status or need, no longer qualify for assistance. … This is not to say that the department is powerless under all circumstances to revoke assistance to those otherwise qualified under the act.

People v. Brannon

194 Mich. App. 121 · Michigan Court of Appeals · May 4, 1992

We do not find the findings of fact and conclusions of law with regard to this issue to be clearly erroneous. … However, great deference is given to the trial court’s assessment of the credibility of witnesses, and its findings of fact will not be reversed unless clearly erroneous.

People v. Hall

249 Mich. App. 262 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Apr 4, 2002

Defendant’s statement was recorded, and the transcript establishes that defendant was advised of his Miranda rights, stated that he understood them, and waived them. … In summary, the evidence establishes that the trial court did not clearly err in finding that defendant’s statement to the police was voluntary. Sexton, supra-, Givans, supra at 119. B.

People v. Bunker

22 Mich. App. 396 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Mar 23, 1970

. *400 At trial it was established by the prosecution through the testimony of a qualified ballistics expert that the gun which fired the fatal shot was the same gun which the police found along the chase route shortly after … of. the record made at the evidentiary hearing, we are unable to say that the trial court *405 was clearly erroneous.

People v. Tomasovich

249 Mich. App. 282 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Jan 18, 2002

The Supreme Court explained the primary rule for statutory interpretation in Sun Valley Foods Co v Ward, 460 Mich 230, 236 ; 596 NW2d 11 (1999): The rules of statutory construction are well established. … If the language of the statute in unambiguous, the Legislature must have intended the meaning clearly expressed, and the statute must be enforced as written. No further judicial construction is required or permitted.

Trepel v. Pontiac Osteopathic Hospital

135 Mich. App. 361 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Jun 18, 1984

To implement the 1975 contract, Trepel entered into separate but substantially identical agree *368 ments with qualified specialists, defendants Dr. Martin T. Rasp and Dr. Bernard H. … Unlike plaintiffs’ claims, the counterclaim clearly alleges unethical conduct —sending letters knowing them to contain false allegations.

Ledsinger v. Burmeister

114 Mich. App. 12 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Mar 3, 1982

Michigan law clearly recognizes this tort as a distinct and separate cause of action. … Moreover, defendant’s alleged statement that he "did not want or need nigger business”, if established, would constitute the publication of a statement that full and equal enjoyment of the goods sold at defendant’s establishment

System Soft Technologies, LLC v. Artemis Technologies, Inc.

301 Mich. App. 642 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Jul 16, 2013

Plaintiff thus has established that mandamus is the proper method of raising his legal challenge to Duggan’s candidacy. … The qualified voter file shall be used to determine the genuineness of a signature on a petition. Signature comparisons shall be made with the digitized signatures in the qualified voter file.

People of Michigan v. Tmando Allen Denson

Michigan Court of Appeals · Oct 1, 2015

But I’m not aware of any plan to charge you and there’s no immunity here . . . there’s no connection.” … Woodward also denied that anyone had told him he would receive immunity in exchange for testifying against defendant.