5 Michigan opinions name it 1 courts 1994–2020 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Michigan courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Loweke v. Ann Arbor Ceiling & Partition Co, LLCgreen1 sentence2016See Loweke, 489 Mich at 162 . | 1 | 1 |
Patterson v. Kleimangreen2 sentences1994See Patterson v Kleiman, 199 Mich App 191, 192 ; 500 NW2d 761 (1993). 1994See Patterson v Kleiman, 199 Mich App 191, 192 ; 500 NW2d 761 (1993). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Michigan. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Phillips v. Mazda Motor Manufacturing (USA) Corp.
green
2 sentences2020This Court has also stated that “[a] malpractice claim requires proof of simple negligence based on a breach of a professional standard of care.” Phillips v Mazda Motor Mfg (USA) Corp, 204 Mich App 401, 409 ; 516 NW2d 502 (1994), abrogated on other grounds Ormsby v Capital Welding, Inc, 471 Mich 45 ; 684 NW2d 320 (2004). 2020This Court has also stated that “[a] malpractice claim requires proof of simple negligence based on a breach of a professional standard of care.” Phillips v Mazda Motor Mfg (USA) Corp, 204 Mich App 401, 409 ; 516 NW2d 502 (1994), abrogated on other grounds Ormsby v Capital Welding, Inc, 471 Mich 45 ; 684 NW2d 320 (2004). | 4 | 2015–2020 |
Ormsby v. Capital Welding, Inc
green
2 sentences2020This Court has also stated that “[a] malpractice claim requires proof of simple negligence based on a breach of a professional standard of care.” Phillips v Mazda Motor Mfg (USA) Corp, 204 Mich App 401, 409 ; 516 NW2d 502 (1994), abrogated on other grounds Ormsby v Capital Welding, Inc, 471 Mich 45 ; 684 NW2d 320 (2004). 2020This Court has also stated that “[a] malpractice claim requires proof of simple negligence based on a breach of a professional standard of care.” Phillips v Mazda Motor Mfg (USA) Corp, 204 Mich App 401, 409 ; 516 NW2d 502 (1994), abrogated on other grounds Ormsby v Capital Welding, Inc, 471 Mich 45 ; 684 NW2d 320 (2004). | 4 | 2015–2020 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.