Case law

University Medical Affiliates, PC v. Wayne County Executive

142 Mich. App. 135 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Apr 16, 1985

As noted by the trial court, the county still accepts financial responsibility for qualified indigent county residents under the plan. The requirements of § 3.117 are therefore satisfied. … cannot establish the second prerequisite for the issuance of a writ of mandamus.

Saxon v. Department of Social Services

191 Mich. App. 689 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Nov 8, 1991

The injunction also requires the defendant to establish procedures to specifically identify those who do and do not qualify for State Disability Assistance (sda). … statement of the intended action, the reason for the action, a statement that funding for the program has been eliminated, and a statement of the circumstances under which a hearing could be obtained, i.e., none. 7 Plaintiffs clearly

Vidyaarthy C Ramamoorthi v. Chinnaiah Ramamoorthi

323 Mich. App. 324 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Mar 8, 2018

A finding is clearly erroneous if, on all the evidence, the Court is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made. [Quotation marks and citations omitted.] … Germane to the instant case, “an established domicile is not destroyed by a temporary absence if the person has no intention of changing his or her domicile.” Id.

Deborah Henderson v. Dept of Health and Human Services

Michigan Court of Appeals · May 18, 2023

This standard is “indistinguishable” from the clearly-erroneous standard, which provides that “[a] finding is clearly erroneous when, on review of the whole record, this Court is left with the definite and firm conviction … Such “medically needy individuals . . . become eligible for Medicaid benefits only when their incomes and assets are reduced below certain established levels.” Id.

People v. Van Epps

59 Mich. App. 277 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Mar 10, 1975

No claim was made and no testimony was presented to establish that defendant was still operating under the same delusions as he was at the time of his admission to the hospital. … We are unpersuaded by defendant’s argument that the outburst by defendant’s wife violated his rights under the spousal immunity statute, MCLA 600.2162; MSA 27A.2162.

Robert Longrey v. Department of Corrections

Michigan Court of Appeals · Mar 13, 2026

“The doctrine of sovereign immunity has long been firmly established in the common law of this state, and it may not be held to have been waived or abrogated except . . . by an express statutory enactment or by necessary … Similarly, “[i]t is well established that governmental immunity is not an affirmative defense but is instead a characteristic of government.” Fairly v Dep’t of Corrections, 497 Mich 290, 298; 871 NW2d 129 (2015).

Detroit Medical Center v. Titan Insurance

284 Mich. App. 490 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Jun 16, 2009

Moreover, she clearly had a significant relationship with Gonzalez such that permission to use the vehicle apparently was never denied. … While there are facts in common with Chop and Ardt , these facts, by themselves, do not establish ownership.

Porter v. City of Royal Oak

214 Mich. App. 478 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Dec 1, 1995

In other words, the truth of the memorandum had been established. … Because the trial court did not address the governmental immunity claim by defendants, I would leave the question whether plaintiff has pleaded facts in avoidance of governmental immunity for the parties to resolve on remand

in Re the Guardianship of Dorothy Redd

Michigan Court of Appeals · Sep 19, 2017

A factual finding is clearly erroneous when this Court is left with a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made. Id. at 329. … We conclude that Gary has failed to establish that the current probate judge would be unable to rule fairly on remand.

Oscar Goodwin v. City of Detroit

Michigan Court of Appeals · Dec 27, 2018

In reviewing a (C)(8) motion, this Court accepts as true all factual allegations in the claim “to determine whether the claim is so clearly unenforceable as a matter of law that no factual development could establish the … If the plaintiff pleaded an intentional tort, the question is whether the defendant established that he is entitled to individual governmental immunity by showing the following: (a) The acts were undertaken during

In Re Search Warrant on 5000 Northwind Drive

128 Mich. App. 564 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Aug 25, 1983

The department itself is charged with maintaining such records and any of *568 its employees should be considered qualified to disseminate such information. … Ahmed was clearly set forth. The relationship alone illustrates that they would be in an excellent position to know the truth of what they said.

Home Insurance v. Jones & Lamson

144 Mich. App. 91 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Jul 2, 1985

J & L moved for summary judgment in each of the indemnity actions on the bases that, as Casler’s employer, it was completely immune from liability for contribution pursuant to the exclusive remedy provision in the Worker’ … In this case, Casler’s injuries clearly arose out of the employee-employer relationship. Therefore, Casler was limited to the exclusive remedy of worker’s compensation against his employer, J & L.

Huron-Clinton Metropolitan Authority v. Attorney General

146 Mich. App. 79 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Oct 7, 1985

It consists of the aggregate of all the rights, powers, privileges, and immunities (sometimes called the "entire bundle of rights”) pertaining to the land. … Clearly, this result is consistent with plaintiffs purpose. Defendant also argues that under a lease agreement plaintiff would relinquish too much control of public park lands. We disagree.

Balwinski v. City of Bay City

168 Mich. App. 766 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Jun 6, 1988

A finding of fact is clearly erroneous when the reviewing court, after reviewing the entire record, is left with a definite and firm conviction *770 that a mistake has been committed. … Plaintiff additionally argues that the trial court erroneously failed to take into account defendant’s affirmative action plan, under which positions are to be awarded to qualified city employees with the greatest seniority

Catherine Puetz Md v. Spectrum Health Hospitals

324 Mich. App. 51 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Apr 24, 2018

Puetz’s complaint does not clearly identify the statements that she contends placed her in a false light. Her complaint provides: 77. … Thus, when completed, the IP policy was clearly in place, as were at least some of the contracts Puetz signed.

Miller-Davis Co. v. Ahrens Construction, Inc.

285 Mich. App. 289 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Aug 4, 2009

The motion is properly granted when the undisputed facts establish that the moving party is entitled to immunity granted by law. … Thereafter, the evidence clearly establishes that another contractor completed the final phase of the roofs construction by attaching the roofing felt and the standing seam steel skin.

Wayne County v. Wayne County Retirement Commission

267 Mich. App. 230 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Sep 15, 2005

The Authority was empowered by statute “to manage and operate” the qualified airports and their facilities. 4 B. … The date established by the authority shall not be later than the approval date.

Copeland v. Copeland

109 Mich. App. 683 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Sep 22, 1981

Plaintiff was pursuing an educational program which would ultimately qualify her to work as a registered nurse. Following an evidentiary hearing, the trial court increased defendant’s child support obligation. … The court’s own statements clearly reveal that the child support modification was really a subterfuge to benefit plaintiff.

Ass'n of Businesses Advocating Tariff Equity v. Public Service Commission

173 Mich. App. 647 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Dec 19, 1988

The Legislature here clearly provided for appeals of psc cogeneration approvals and even for their stay by a *662 reviewing court. … It is to perform this very estimation process that the U-6798 methodology was established.

Wilcoxon v. Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing Co.

235 Mich. App. 347 · Michigan Court of Appeals · Jul 27, 1999

Being qualified for a job, for purposes of establishing a prima facie case of discrimination, requires only minimal qualification. See Town, supra at 699 (Brickley, J.) … Clearly, Wilcoxon failed to identify anyone who, *370 after being denied disability leave and then failing to return to work, was not terminated from employment.