No syfertize treatment data for this case.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Vitec LLC
v.
Department of Treasury
v.
Department of Treasury
Unpublished
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
VITEC, LLC, UNPUBLISHED April 7, 2016 Plaintiff-Appellee, v No. 324330 Court of Claims DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY, LC Nos. 13-000027-MT 13-000128-MT Defendant-Appellant.
Before: HOEKSTRA, P.J., and METER and M. J. KELLY, JJ.
METER, J. (concurring).
I concur with the majority opinion because Hudsonville Creamery and Ice Cream Co, LLC v Dep’t of Treasury, ___ Mich ___; ___ NW2d ___ (2016) (Docket No. 322968), constitutes binding precedent. However, I continue to believe, in accordance with the analysis set forth in my dissenting opinion in Hudsonville Creamery, that the last sentence of MCL 208.1437(18) does not provide for a refund for an unused carryforward of credit.
/s/ Patrick M. Meter
-1-