People v. English, 743 N.W.2d 909 (Mich. 2008). · Go Syfert
Search
People v. English, 743 N.W.2d 909 (Mich. 2008). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
G Cite
cited 3× by 1 distinct case · “[W]e conclude that genuine issues of material fact existed with regard to whether defendants had revoked their counteroffer.... ”
11 citation events (11 in the last 25 years) across 3 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Ellis v. Kaye-Kibbey (miwd, 2008-10-10)
Top citers, strongest first. 2 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (quoted) Ellis v. Kaye-Kibbey
W.D. Mich. · 2008 · signal: see · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
e conclude that genuine issues of material fact existed with regard to whether defendants had revoked their counteroffer....
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Warren English v. Mary Berghuis
6th Cir. · 2018 · signal: see also · confidence medium
The conclusion that there was no adjudication on the merits certainly underlay the dissent on the Michigan Court of Appeals, with which two justices concurred in their own dissent on review by the Michigan Supreme Court: "While the trial court erred in finding that the juror was excusable for cause simply because the juror had been sexually abused, it does not follow that the juror was not, in fact, excusable for cause." English , 2007 WL 4245412 , at *5 (White, J., dissenting); see also English , 743 N.W.2d at 910 (Cavanagh and Kelly, JJ., dissenting).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
PEOPLE of the State of Michigan, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Warren Edward ENGLISH, III, Defendant-Appellant.
135519.
Michigan Supreme Court.
Feb 6, 2008.
743 N.W.2d 909
Michael F. Cavanagh and Marilyn J. Kelly.
Cited by 3 opinions  |  Published
1 passage pin-cited by 1 case
Pinpoint authority: bottom 58%
Citer courts: W.D. Michigan (1)

[*910] On order of the Court, the motions for immediate consideration are GRANTED. The application for leave to appeal the December 4, 2007 judgment and order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. The motion to reinstate bond is DENIED.

MICHAEL F. CAVANAGH and MARILYN J. KELLY, JJ., would remand this case to the trial court for reconsideration under the appropriate standard, as explained in the partially dissenting opinion in the Court of Appeals, of whether the juror was excusable for cause.