18 Michigan opinions name it 2 courts 1899–2025 5 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 |
|---|---|---|
Auto Club Insurance v. New York Life Insurancegreen2 sentences2021See also Auto Club Ins Ass’n, 440 Mich at 133 . 52 MCL 500.3142(2). 53 MCL 500.3142(4). 54 MCL 600.6013(7). 2021See also Auto Club Ins Ass’n, 440 Mich at 133 . 52 MCL 500.3142(2). 53 MCL 500.3142(4). 54 MCL 600.6013(7). | 2 | 2 |
People v. Skinnergreen1 sentence2025See Skinner, 502 Mich at 128 (“The trial court also does not have to explicitly find that defendant is ‘rare.’ Indeed, we cannot even imagine how a trial court would go about determining whether a particular defendant is ‘rare’ or not.”). 2 While not dispositive, this is also how the prosecution interprets defendant’s argument on appeal, and defendant never filed a reply contesting the prosecution’s interpretation. -3- Yet, here, before the trial court had an opportunity to make the required findings, defendant unequivocally waived his right to the remainder of the hearing. | 1 | 1 |
National Security Archive v. Central Intelligence Agencygreen1 sentence2016See Nat’l Security Archive v Central Intelligence Agency, 564 F Supp 2d 29, 34 (D DC, 2008) (holding that the plaintiffs case for a federal FOIA violation was moot because the defendant granted the requests and placed them in the “FOIA queue” for processing). 4 Finally, we note that plaintiff and the trial court have suggested that unless the grant of a FOIA request is interpreted to require its immediate fulfillment, a public body could grant a request yet never actually fulfill it. | 1 | 1 |
Bush v. Shabahanggreen1 sentence2016In addition, MCL 15.234(8) now expressly provides that a public body’s “response” under MCL 15.235 “shall also contain a best efforts estimate by the public body regarding the time frame it will take the public body to comply with the law in providing the public records to the requestor.” This subsection provides further evidence that the Legislature intended that granting a request under MCL 15.235 be distinct from the fulfillment of that request. 3 Further, in light of the remainder of our analysis, as well as the fact that the nature of the amendment to MCL 15.234 was to substantially revis | 1 | 1 |
Wood v. Detroit Automobile Inter-Insurance Exchangegreen2 sentences2002Wood v Detroit Automobile Inter-Ins Exch, 413 Mich 573, 589, n 17 ; 321 NW2d 653 (1982). 2002Wood v Detroit Automobile Inter-Ins Exch, 413 Mich 573, 589, n 17 ; 321 NW2d 653 (1982). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Michigan. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Pirgu v. United Services Automobile Association
green
2 sentences2021Instead of calculating the “baseline figure” by multiplying the fee customarily charged in the locality for similar legal services by the reasonable number of hours expended, -3- see Pirgu, 499 Mich at 281 , the trial court multiplied the rate it had established for each attorney by the number of hours it found reasonable. 2018Instead of calculating the “baseline figure” by multiplying the fee customarily charged in the locality for similar legal services by the reasonable number of hours expended, see Pirgu, 499 Mich at 281 , the trial court multiplied the rate it had established for each attorney by the number of hours it found reasonable. | 3 | 2018–2021 |
Woodland Ltd. Partnership v. Wulff
green
1 sentence2025However, we took a different view of the matter in [Woodland Limited Partnership v Wulff, 868 A2d 860 (DC, 2005)], holding that whether a party to an arbitration agreement had waived its right to compel arbitration (in that case, by litigating the dispute in court) was presumptively a question to be decided by the arbitrator, not the court. | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Henry Ford Health System v. Everest National Insurance Company
green
1 sentence2020However, we conclude that this Court’s decision in Henry Ford Health Sys, 326 Mich App 398 , compels reversal of the trial court’s decision granting summary disposition. | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Williams v. AAA MICHIGAN
green
2 sentences2019Any part of the remainder of the claim that is later supported by reasonable proof is overdue if not paid within 30 days after the proof is received by the insurer. . . . (3) An overdue payment bears simple interest at the rate of 12% per annum. [MCL 500.3142.] The penalty interest provision “is intended to penalize an insurer that is dilatory in paying a claim.” Williams v AAA Michigan, 250 Mich App 249, 265 ; 646 NW2d 476 (2002). 2019Any part of the remainder of the claim that is later supported by reasonable proof is overdue if not paid within 30 days after the proof is received by the insurer. . . . (3) An overdue payment bears simple interest at the rate of 12% per annum. [MCL 500.3142.] The penalty interest provision “is intended to penalize an insurer that is dilatory in paying a claim.” Williams v AAA Michigan, 250 Mich App 249, 265 ; 646 NW2d 476 (2002). | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Heid v. Aaasulewski
green
2 sentences2016As discussed in Heid v AAASulewski, 209 Mich App 587, 594 ; 532 NW2d 205 (1995), “[W]e are unwilling to conclude that mathematical equality on the statutory factors necessarily amounts to an evidentiary standoff that precludes a party from satisfying the clear and convincing standard of proof.” The Court further stated: We disapprove the rigid application of a mathematical formulation that equality or near equality on the statutory factors prevents a party from satisfying a clear and convincing evidence standard of proof. 2016As discussed in Heid v AAASulewski, 209 Mich App 587, 594 ; 532 NW2d 205 (1995), “[W]e are unwilling to conclude that mathematical equality on the statutory factors necessarily amounts to an evidentiary standoff that precludes a party from satisfying the clear and convincing standard of proof.” The Court further stated: We disapprove the rigid application of a mathematical formulation that equality or near equality on the statutory factors prevents a party from satisfying a clear and convincing evidence standard of proof. | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Nash v. Detroit Automobile Inter-Insurance Exchange
green
2 sentences2016“The aim of the no-fault act in general, and § 3142 specifically, is to promptly and adequately compensate persons who were injured in a motor vehicle mishap.” Nash v Detroit Auto Inter-Ins Exchange, 120 Mich App 568, 572 ; 327 NW2d 521 (1982). 2016“The aim of the no-fault act in general, and § 3142 specifically, is to promptly and adequately compensate persons who were injured in a motor vehicle mishap.” Nash v Detroit Auto Inter-Ins Exchange, 120 Mich App 568, 572 ; 327 NW2d 521 (1982). | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Davey v. Detroit Automobile Inter-Insurance Exchange
green
2 sentences2007For the purpose of calculating the extent to which benefits are overdue, payment shall be treated as made on the date a draft or other valid instrument was placed in the United States mail in a properly addressed, postpaid envelope, or, if not so posted, on the date of delivery. [2] A person making a claim shall "be examined by physicians chosen and paid by us as often as we reasonably may require." [3] Shavers v. Attorney General, 402 Mich. 554, 579 , 267 N.W.2d 72 (1978); Davey v. Detroit Automobile Inter-Ins Exch., 414 Mich. 1, 10 , 322 N.W.2d 541 (1982); Thompson v. Detroit Automobile Inte 2007For the purpose of calculating the extent to which benefits are overdue, payment shall be treated as made on the date a draft or other valid instrument was placed in the United States mail in a properly addressed, postpaid envelope, or, if not so posted, on the date of delivery. [2] A person making a claim shall "be examined by physicians chosen and paid by us as often as we reasonably may require." [3] Shavers v. Attorney General, 402 Mich. 554, 579 , 267 N.W.2d 72 (1978); Davey v. Detroit Automobile Inter-Ins Exch., 414 Mich. 1, 10 , 322 N.W.2d 541 (1982); Thompson v. Detroit Automobile Inte | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Shavers v. Attorney General
green
2 sentences2007For the purpose of calculating the extent to which benefits are overdue, payment shall be treated as made on the date a draft or other valid instrument was placed in the United States mail in a properly addressed, postpaid envelope, or, if not so posted, on the date of delivery. [2] A person making a claim shall "be examined by physicians chosen and paid by us as often as we reasonably may require." [3] Shavers v. Attorney General, 402 Mich. 554, 579 , 267 N.W.2d 72 (1978); Davey v. Detroit Automobile Inter-Ins Exch., 414 Mich. 1, 10 , 322 N.W.2d 541 (1982); Thompson v. Detroit Automobile Inte 2007For the purpose of calculating the extent to which benefits are overdue, payment shall be treated as made on the date a draft or other valid instrument was placed in the United States mail in a properly addressed, postpaid envelope, or, if not so posted, on the date of delivery. [2] A person making a claim shall "be examined by physicians chosen and paid by us as often as we reasonably may require." [3] Shavers v. Attorney General, 402 Mich. 554, 579 , 267 N.W.2d 72 (1978); Davey v. Detroit Automobile Inter-Ins Exch., 414 Mich. 1, 10 , 322 N.W.2d 541 (1982); Thompson v. Detroit Automobile Inte | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Thompson v. Detroit Automobile Inter-Insurance Exchange
green
2 sentences2007For the purpose of calculating the extent to which benefits are overdue, payment shall be treated as made on the date a draft or other valid instrument was placed in the United States mail in a properly addressed, postpaid envelope, or, if not so posted, on the date of delivery. [2] A person making a claim shall "be examined by physicians chosen and paid by us as often as we reasonably may require." [3] Shavers v. Attorney General, 402 Mich. 554, 579 , 267 N.W.2d 72 (1978); Davey v. Detroit Automobile Inter-Ins Exch., 414 Mich. 1, 10 , 322 N.W.2d 541 (1982); Thompson v. Detroit Automobile Inte 2007For the purpose of calculating the extent to which benefits are overdue, payment shall be treated as made on the date a draft or other valid instrument was placed in the United States mail in a properly addressed, postpaid envelope, or, if not so posted, on the date of delivery. [2] A person making a claim shall "be examined by physicians chosen and paid by us as often as we reasonably may require." [3] Shavers v. Attorney General, 402 Mich. 554, 579 , 267 N.W.2d 72 (1978); Davey v. Detroit Automobile Inter-Ins Exch., 414 Mich. 1, 10 , 322 N.W.2d 541 (1982); Thompson v. Detroit Automobile Inte | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Davis v. Citizens Insurance Co. of America
green
2 sentences2002Davis v Citizens Ins Co of America, 195 Mich App 323, 328 ; 489 NW2d 214 (1992). 2002Davis v Citizens Ins Co of America, 195 Mich App 323, 328 ; 489 NW2d 214 (1992). | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Cook v. Detroit Automobile Inter-Insurance Exchange
green
2 sentences1983For the purpose of calculating the extent to which benefits are overdue, payment shall be treated as made on the date a draft or other valid instrument was placed in the United States mail in a properly addressed, postpaid envelope, or, if not so posted, on the date of delivery. "(3) An overdue payment bears simple interest at the rate of 12% per annum.” In considering whether an award under this section depends on the reasonableness of the denial of payment, this Court held in Cook v DAIIE, 114 Mich App 53, 54-55 ; 318 NW2d 476 (1982): "Our further review convinces us that the standards for d 1983For the purpose of calculating the extent to which benefits are overdue, payment shall be treated as made on the date a draft or other valid instrument was placed in the United States mail in a properly addressed, postpaid envelope, or, if not so posted, on the date of delivery. "(3) An overdue payment bears simple interest at the rate of 12% per annum.” In considering whether an award under this section depends on the reasonableness of the denial of payment, this Court held in Cook v DAIIE, 114 Mich App 53, 54-55 ; 318 NW2d 476 (1982): "Our further review convinces us that the standards for d | 1 | 1983–1983 |
People v. Hodo
green
2 sentences1975People v Hodo, 51 Mich App 628 ; 215 NW2d 733 (1974), People v Harper, 43 Mich App 500 ; 204 NW2d 263 (1972). 1975People v Hodo, 51 Mich App 628 ; 215 NW2d 733 (1974), People v Harper, 43 Mich App 500 ; 204 NW2d 263 (1972). | 1 | 1975–1975 |
People v. Harper
green
2 sentences1975People v Hodo, 51 Mich App 628 ; 215 NW2d 733 (1974), People v Harper, 43 Mich App 500 ; 204 NW2d 263 (1972). 1975People v Hodo, 51 Mich App 628 ; 215 NW2d 733 (1974), People v Harper, 43 Mich App 500 ; 204 NW2d 263 (1972). | 1 | 1975–1975 |
People v. Ray
green
1 sentence1975In neither of those two charges is there the coercive requirement of unanimous agreement as was found in Ray, supra. We agree with the Court in People v Bates 5 that a charge such as the one given in this case is not prejudicial, rather it "merely indicated a logical method whereby the various possible verdicts would be considered in an orderly sequence”. 6 The remainder of the instruction to the jury, taken as a whole, adequately informed them of the applicable law. | 1 | 1975–1975 |
Pierce v. Kneeland
green
1 sentence1899Pierce v. Kneeland, 16 Wis. 672 ( 84 Am. | 1 | 1899–1899 |
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.