Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
22 Michigan opinions name it 2 courts 2006–2024 8 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 |
|---|---|---|
Allison v. AEW CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, LLPgreen2 sentences2024This statute states: (1) In every lease or license of residential premises, the lessor or licensor covenants: (a) That the premises and all common areas are fit for the use intended by the parties. (b) To keep the premises in reasonable repair during the term of the lease or license, and to comply with the applicable health and safety laws of the state and of the local unit of government where the premises are located, except when the disrepair or violation of the applicable health or safety laws has been caused by the tenants wilful or irresponsible conduct or lack of conduct. [MCL 554.139(1) 2019Plaintiff also argues on appeal that defendant breached its statutory duty under MCL 554.139(1)(b), which states: -8- (1) In every lease or license of residential premises, the lessor or licensor covenants: * * * (b) To keep the premises in reasonable repair during the term of the lease or license, and to comply with the applicable health and safety laws of the state and of the local unit of government where the premises are located, except when the disrepair or violation of the applicable health or safety laws has been caused by the tenants wilful or irresponsible conduct or lack of conduct. | 5 | 12 |
Loweke v. Ann Arbor Ceiling & Partition Co, LLCgreen2 sentences2021See Loweke v Ann Arbor Ceiling & Partition Co, LLC, 489 Mich 157, 162 ; 809 NW2d 553 (2011). 2021See Loweke v Ann Arbor Ceiling & Partition Co, LLC, 489 Mich 157, 162 ; 809 NW2d 553 (2011). | 1 | 1 |
Mullen v. Zerfasgreen1 sentence2019As explained by our Supreme Court in Mullen v Zerfas, 480 Mich 989, 990 (2007), “The covenants created by [MCL 554.139(1)] establish duties of a lessor or licensor of residential property to the lessee or licensee of the residential property, most typically of a landlord to a tenant. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Michigan. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Benton v. Dart Properties Inc.
green
2 sentences2019MCL 554.139 states, in relevant part: (1) In every lease or license of residential premises, the lessor or licensor covenants: (a) That the premises and all common areas are fit for the use intended by the parties. (b) To keep the premises in reasonable repair during the term of the lease or license, and to comply with the applicable health and safety laws of the state and of the local unit of government where the premises are located, except when the disrepair or violation of the applicable health or safety laws has been caused by the tenants willful or irresponsible conduct or lack “[T]he op 2019MCL 554.139 states, in relevant part: (1) In every lease or license of residential premises, the lessor or licensor covenants: (a) That the premises and all common areas are fit for the use intended by the parties. (b) To keep the premises in reasonable repair during the term of the lease or license, and to comply with the applicable health and safety laws of the state and of the local unit of government where the premises are located, except when the disrepair or violation of the applicable health or safety laws has been caused by the tenants willful or irresponsible conduct or lack “[T]he op | 4 | 2007–2022 |
Quinto v. Woodward Detroit CVS, LLC
green
2 sentences2018“To establish a prima facie case of negligence, a plaintiff must prove four elements: (1) a duty owed by the defendant to the plaintiff, (2) a breach of that duty, (3) causation, and (4) damages.” Quinto v Woodward Detroit CVS, LLC, 305 Mich App 73, 75 ; 850 NW2d 642 (2014) (quotation marks and citation omitted). 2018“To establish a prima facie case of negligence, a plaintiff must prove four elements: (1) a duty owed by the defendant to the plaintiff, (2) a breach of that duty, (3) causation, and (4) damages.” Quinto v Woodward Detroit CVS, LLC, 305 Mich App 73, 75 ; 850 NW2d 642 (2014) (quotation marks and citation omitted). | 2 | 2018–2018 |
Hadden v. McDermitt Apartments, LLC
green
2 sentences2024Further, in Hadden v McDermitt Apartments, LLC, 287 Mich App 124, 130 ; 782 NW2d 800 (2010), this Court considered an exterior stairway to be a common area. 2024Further, in Hadden v McDermitt Apartments, LLC, 287 Mich App 124, 130 ; 782 NW2d 800 (2010), this Court considered an exterior stairway to be a common area. | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Smith v. Globe Life Insurance
green
2 sentences2016Smith v Globe Life Ins Co, 460 Mich 446, 454-455 ; 597 NW2d 28 (1999). -1- MCL 554.139(1) provides, in relevant part: In every lease or license of residential premises, the lessor or licensor covenants: (a) That the premises and all common areas are fit for the use intended by the parties. (b) To keep the premises in reasonable repair during the term of the lease or license, and to comply with the applicable health and safety laws of the state and of the local unit of government where the premises are located, except when the disrepair or violation of the applicable health or safety laws has b 2016Smith v Globe Life Ins Co, 460 Mich 446, 454-455 ; 597 NW2d 28 (1999). -1- MCL 554.139(1) provides, in relevant part: In every lease or license of residential premises, the lessor or licensor covenants: (a) That the premises and all common areas are fit for the use intended by the parties. (b) To keep the premises in reasonable repair during the term of the lease or license, and to comply with the applicable health and safety laws of the state and of the local unit of government where the premises are located, except when the disrepair or violation of the applicable health or safety laws has b | 1 | 2016–2016 |
PIC Maintenance, Inc. v. Department of Treasury
green
2 sentences2015“When a statute’s language is clear and unambiguous, we must apply the terms of the statute to the circumstances of the particular case . . . and we will not read words into the plain language of the statute.” PIC Maintenance, Inc v Dep’t of Treasury, 293 Mich App 403, 410-411 ; 809 NW2d 669 (2011). 2015“When a statute’s language is clear and unambiguous, we must apply the terms of the statute to the circumstances of the particular case . . . and we will not read words into the plain language of the statute.” PIC Maintenance, Inc v Dep’t of Treasury, 293 Mich App 403, 410-411 ; 809 NW2d 669 (2011). | 1 | 2015–2015 |
G C Timmis & Co. v. Guardian Alarm Co.
green
2 sentences2008The primary goal of statutory interpretation is “to ascertain the legislative intent that may be reasonably inferred from the words expressed in the statute.” G C Timmis & Co v Guardian Alarm Co, 468 Mich 416, 420 ; 662 NW2d 710 (2003). 2008The primary goal of statutory interpretation is “to ascertain the legislative intent that may be reasonably inferred from the words expressed in the statute.” G C Timmis & Co v Guardian Alarm Co, 468 Mich 416, 420 ; 662 NW2d 710 (2003). | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Allison v. AEW Capital Management, LLP
neutral
2 sentences2007This Court recently addressed this issue in Allison v AEW Capital Mgt, LLP (On Reconsideration), 274 Mich App 663; 736 NW2d 307 (2007), which involved identical facts. 2007This Court recently addressed this issue in Allison v AEW Capital Mgt, LLP (On Reconsideration), 274 Mich App 663; 736 NW2d 307 (2007), which involved identical facts. | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Scott M Cain v. Waste Management Inc
green
1 sentence2006Cain v Waste Mgt, Inc (After Remand), 472 Mich 236, 245 ; 697 NW2d 130 (2005). | 1 | 2006–2006 |
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.