20 Michigan opinions name it 2 courts 1956–2025 2 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 |
|---|---|---|
People v. Hoaggreen1 sentence2023See Hoag, 460 Mich at 6 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Michigan. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
People v. Sabin
green
2 sentences2020Since defendant did not preserve this claim by filing a motion for a new trial or a Ginther3 hearing to develop a record to support the claim,4 People v Sabin (On Second Remand), 242 Mich App 656, 658-659 ; 620 NW2d 19 (2000), “our review is limited to the facts on the record.” People v Wilson, 242 Mich App 350, 352 ; 619 NW2d 413 (2000), citing People v Hedelsky, 162 Mich App 382, 387 ; 412 NW2d 746 (1987). 2020Since defendant did not preserve this claim by filing a motion for a new trial or a Ginther3 hearing to develop a record to support the claim,4 People v Sabin (On Second Remand), 242 Mich App 656, 658-659 ; 620 NW2d 19 (2000), “our review is limited to the facts on the record.” People v Wilson, 242 Mich App 350, 352 ; 619 NW2d 413 (2000), citing People v Hedelsky, 162 Mich App 382, 387 ; 412 NW2d 746 (1987). | 11 | 2017–2020 |
People v. Payne
green
1 sentence2025Again, “[a]n appellant may not merely announce his position and leave it to this Court to discover and rationalize the basis for his claims.” Payne, 285 Mich App at 195 . | 1 | 2025–2025 |
People v. Wilson
green
2 sentences2020Since defendant did not preserve this claim by filing a motion for a new trial or a Ginther3 hearing to develop a record to support the claim,4 People v Sabin (On Second Remand), 242 Mich App 656, 658-659 ; 620 NW2d 19 (2000), “our review is limited to the facts on the record.” People v Wilson, 242 Mich App 350, 352 ; 619 NW2d 413 (2000), citing People v Hedelsky, 162 Mich App 382, 387 ; 412 NW2d 746 (1987). 2020Since defendant did not preserve this claim by filing a motion for a new trial or a Ginther3 hearing to develop a record to support the claim,4 People v Sabin (On Second Remand), 242 Mich App 656, 658-659 ; 620 NW2d 19 (2000), “our review is limited to the facts on the record.” People v Wilson, 242 Mich App 350, 352 ; 619 NW2d 413 (2000), citing People v Hedelsky, 162 Mich App 382, 387 ; 412 NW2d 746 (1987). | 1 | 2020–2020 |
People v. Hedelsky
green
2 sentences2020Since defendant did not preserve this claim by filing a motion for a new trial or a Ginther3 hearing to develop a record to support the claim,4 People v Sabin (On Second Remand), 242 Mich App 656, 658-659 ; 620 NW2d 19 (2000), “our review is limited to the facts on the record.” People v Wilson, 242 Mich App 350, 352 ; 619 NW2d 413 (2000), citing People v Hedelsky, 162 Mich App 382, 387 ; 412 NW2d 746 (1987). 2020Since defendant did not preserve this claim by filing a motion for a new trial or a Ginther3 hearing to develop a record to support the claim,4 People v Sabin (On Second Remand), 242 Mich App 656, 658-659 ; 620 NW2d 19 (2000), “our review is limited to the facts on the record.” People v Wilson, 242 Mich App 350, 352 ; 619 NW2d 413 (2000), citing People v Hedelsky, 162 Mich App 382, 387 ; 412 NW2d 746 (1987). | 1 | 2020–2020 |
People v. Gingrich
green
2 sentences2020The record on appeal “consists of ‘the original papers filed in that court or a certified copy, the transcript of any testimony or other proceedings in the case appealed, and the exhibits introduced.’ ” People v Gingrich, 307 Mich App 656 , 659 n 1; 862 NW2d 432 (2014), quoting MCR 7.210(A)(1). 2020The record on appeal “consists of ‘the original papers filed in that court or a certified copy, the transcript of any testimony or other proceedings in the case appealed, and the exhibits introduced.’ ” People v Gingrich, 307 Mich App 656 , 659 n 1; 862 NW2d 432 (2014), quoting MCR 7.210(A)(1). | 1 | 2020–2020 |
People v. Heflin
green
2 sentences2019People v Heflin, 434 Mich 482, 501-503 ; 456 NW2d 10 (1990), citing People v Arthur Jones, 419 Mich 577, 579-580 ; 358 NW2d 837 (1984) (defendant’s girlfriend testified that after the shooting, defendant “just kept mumbling, ‘It was an accident. 2019People v Heflin, 434 Mich 482, 501-503 ; 456 NW2d 10 (1990), citing People v Arthur Jones, 419 Mich 577, 579-580 ; 358 NW2d 837 (1984) (defendant’s girlfriend testified that after the shooting, defendant “just kept mumbling, ‘It was an accident. | 1 | 2019–2019 |
People v. Jones
green
2 sentences2019People v Heflin, 434 Mich 482, 501-503 ; 456 NW2d 10 (1990), citing People v Arthur Jones, 419 Mich 577, 579-580 ; 358 NW2d 837 (1984) (defendant’s girlfriend testified that after the shooting, defendant “just kept mumbling, ‘It was an accident. 2019People v Heflin, 434 Mich 482, 501-503 ; 456 NW2d 10 (1990), citing People v Arthur Jones, 419 Mich 577, 579-580 ; 358 NW2d 837 (1984) (defendant’s girlfriend testified that after the shooting, defendant “just kept mumbling, ‘It was an accident. | 1 | 2019–2019 |
People v. Petri
green
1 sentence2017Petri, 279 Mich App at 413 . | 1 | 2017–2017 |
People v. Watson
green
2 sentences2016People v Watson, 245 Mich App 572, 587 ; 629 NW2d 411 (2001) (an appellant cannot simply announce his position and leave it for this Court to discover and rationalize the basis for his claims). 2016People v Watson, 245 Mich App 572, 587 ; 629 NW2d 411 (2001) (an appellant cannot simply announce his position and leave it for this Court to discover and rationalize the basis for his claims). | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Peterson Novelties, Inc v. City of Berkley
green
1 sentence2016Peterson Novelties, Inc, 259 Mich App at 14 . | 1 | 2016–2016 |
People v. Nelson Johnson
green
2 sentences1981"Ex parte affidavits, filed for the first time in the appellate brief, may not serve to enlarge the record on appeal.” People v Nelson Johnson, 58 Mich App 473, 478 ; 228 NW2d 429 (1975). 1981"Ex parte affidavits, filed for the first time in the appellate brief, may not serve to enlarge the record on appeal.” People v Nelson Johnson, 58 Mich App 473, 478 ; 228 NW2d 429 (1975). | 1 | 1981–1981 |
Drake v. Norge Division, Borg-Warner Corp.
green
2 sentences1978There was but a single injury in this case.” 48 Mich App at 95 . 1978There was but a single injury in this case." 48 Mich App at 95 . *516 Thus, on facts almost identical to the case at bar this Court has held that the one-year-back rule did not apply. | 1 | 1978–1978 |
Olin v. Henderson
green
1 sentence1956In Phelps v. Brevoort, 207 Mich 429 , it was held, citing the earlier case of Olin v. Henderson, 120 Mich 149 , that: “To establish a boundary line by agreement and acquiescence, not only must there have been an express agreement, and monuments erected and acquiesced in, but a doubt or controversy must have existed as to the true line; otherwise the statute (,CL 1915, § 11975) prohibiting the conveyance of land by parol renders the agreement inoperative.” (Syllabus 1.) The facts in the instant case do not support plaintiffs’ claim that the fence in question has been acquiesced in as the true b | 1 | 1956–1956 |
Phelps v. Brevoort
neutral
1 sentence1956In Phelps v. Brevoort, 207 Mich 429 , it was held, citing the earlier case of Olin v. Henderson, 120 Mich 149 , that: “To establish a boundary line by agreement and acquiescence, not only must there have been an express agreement, and monuments erected and acquiesced in, but a doubt or controversy must have existed as to the true line; otherwise the statute (,CL 1915, § 11975) prohibiting the conveyance of land by parol renders the agreement inoperative.” (Syllabus 1.) The facts in the instant case do not support plaintiffs’ claim that the fence in question has been acquiesced in as the true b | 1 | 1956–1956 |
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.