malicious prosecution claim in Michigan

17 Michigan opinions name it 2 courts 1978–2024 3 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.

Followed or applied (5)

Case	Followed	Cited
Sykes v. Andersongreen ca6 · 2010 · cited in 3 Michigan opinions naming this issue, 2014–2018 2 sentences 2018Notably, a plaintiff is required to present some evidence that the impact of a defendant’s misstatements and falsehood in their investigatory material “extended beyond the plaintiffs’ initial arrest and ultimately influenced the Plaintiffs’ continued detention.” Sykes, 625 F3d at 316 . 2014A person who has been legally arrested may bring an action for malicious prosecution, but is required to show that the defendant acted with malice. ... “‘[One] who instigates or participates in a lawful arrest, as for example an arrest made under a properly issued warrant by an officer charged with the duty of enforcing it, may become liable for malicious prosecution, . . . but he is not liable for false imprisonment, since no false imprisonment has occurred.’” [Citation omitted.] With respect to the elements of malicious prosecution, there is no element specifically requiring proof of an abse	1	3
Hughes v. Almena Townshipgreen michctapp · 2009 · cited in 1 Michigan opinions naming this issue, 2022–2022 2 sentences 2022See Hughes v Almena Twp, 284 Mich App 50, 72 ; 771 NW2d 453 (2009) (“The failure to cite sufficient authority results in the abandonment of an issue on appeal.”). -7- Affirmed in part,6 vacated in part, and remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. 2022See Hughes v Almena Twp, 284 Mich App 50, 72 ; 771 NW2d 453 (2009) (“The failure to cite sufficient authority results in the abandonment of an issue on appeal.”). -7- Affirmed in part,6 vacated in part, and remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.	1	1
People v. Ricegreen michctapp · 1998 · cited in 1 Michigan opinions naming this issue, 2009–2009 2 sentences 2009See id. at 21-24 , 672 N.W.2d 351 . [2] Defendant does not claim that the prosecutor failed to identify the officers during discovery. [3] This case is similar to People v. Rice, 231 Mich.App. 126, 133-134 , 585 N.W.2d 331 (1998), rev'd 459 Mich. 899 , 589 N.W.2d 280 (1998), mod. 459 Mich. 929 , 615 N.W.2d 737 (1998), in which this Court found a violation of the defendant's right to self-representation where the trial court had not complied with the requirements of Anderson and MCR 6.005(D). 2009See id. at 21-24 , 672 N.W.2d 351 . [2] Defendant does not claim that the prosecutor failed to identify the officers during discovery. [3] This case is similar to People v. Rice, 231 Mich.App. 126, 133-134 , 585 N.W.2d 331 (1998), rev'd 459 Mich. 899 , 589 N.W.2d 280 (1998), mod. 459 Mich. 929 , 615 N.W.2d 737 (1998), in which this Court found a violation of the defendant's right to self-representation where the trial court had not complied with the requirements of Anderson and MCR 6.005(D).	1	1
Peterson Novelties, Inc v. City of Berkleygreen michctapp · 2003 · cited in 1 Michigan opinions naming this issue, 2009–2009 2 sentences 2009See id. at 21-24 , 672 N.W.2d 351 . [2] Defendant does not claim that the prosecutor failed to identify the officers during discovery. [3] This case is similar to People v. Rice, 231 Mich.App. 126, 133-134 , 585 N.W.2d 331 (1998), rev'd 459 Mich. 899 , 589 N.W.2d 280 (1998), mod. 459 Mich. 929 , 615 N.W.2d 737 (1998), in which this Court found a violation of the defendant's right to self-representation where the trial court had not complied with the requirements of Anderson and MCR 6.005(D). 2009See id. at 21-24 , 672 N.W.2d 351 . [2] Defendant does not claim that the prosecutor failed to identify the officers during discovery. [3] This case is similar to People v. Rice, 231 Mich.App. 126, 133-134 , 585 N.W.2d 331 (1998), rev'd 459 Mich. 899 , 589 N.W.2d 280 (1998), mod. 459 Mich. 929 , 615 N.W.2d 737 (1998), in which this Court found a violation of the defendant's right to self-representation where the trial court had not complied with the requirements of Anderson and MCR 6.005(D).	1	1
Zmija v. Barongreen michctapp · 1982 · cited in 1 Michigan opinions naming this issue, 1983–1983 2 sentences 1983Affirmed. 1 The court rule governing this cause of action is GCR 1963, 757. 2 Tillman v Beard, 121 Mich 475, 477 ; 80 NW 248 (1899). 3 Hollis v Baker, 45 Mich App 666, 670 ; 207 NW2d 138 (1973); 32 Am Jur 2d, False Imprisonment, § 47, p 108; Maliniemi v Gronlund, 92 Mich 222, 227-228 ; 52 NW 627 (1892). 4 207 Mich 385, 387 ; 174 NW 138 (1919). 5 Willis v Nienow, 113 Mich App 30, 33 ; 317 NW2d 273 (1982); Layton v Quinn, 120 Mich App 708, 712 ; 328 NW2d 95 (1982). 6 McCann v Michigan, 398 Mich 65, 77 ; 247 NW2d 521 (1976); Keenan v Secretary of State, 103 Mich App 82, 84 ; 302 NW2d 602 (1981). 1983Affirmed. 1 The court rule governing this cause of action is GCR 1963, 757. 2 Tillman v Beard, 121 Mich 475, 477 ; 80 NW 248 (1899). 3 Hollis v Baker, 45 Mich App 666, 670 ; 207 NW2d 138 (1973); 32 Am Jur 2d, False Imprisonment, § 47, p 108; Maliniemi v Gronlund, 92 Mich 222, 227-228 ; 52 NW 627 (1892). 4 207 Mich 385, 387 ; 174 NW 138 (1919). 5 Willis v Nienow, 113 Mich App 30, 33 ; 317 NW2d 273 (1982); Layton v Quinn, 120 Mich App 708, 712 ; 328 NW2d 95 (1982). 6 McCann v Michigan, 398 Mich 65, 77 ; 247 NW2d 521 (1976); Keenan v Secretary of State, 103 Mich App 82, 84 ; 302 NW2d 602 (1981).	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

Case	Negative	Cited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Michigan. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (18)

Case	Cited	Years
Matthews v. Blue Cross and Blue Shield green mich · 1998 2 sentences 2024To establish a claim of malicious prosecution, a plaintiff has the burden to prove (1) that the defendant has initiated a criminal prosecution against him, (2) that the criminal proceedings terminated in his favor, (3) that the private person who instituted or maintained the prosecution lacked probable cause for his actions, and (4) that the action was undertaken with malice or a purpose in instituting the criminal claim other than bringing the offender to justice. [Matthews v Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Mich, 456 Mich 365, 378 ; 572 NW2d 603 (1998).] A malicious prosecution claim brought agai 2024To establish a claim of malicious prosecution, a plaintiff has the burden to prove (1) that the defendant has initiated a criminal prosecution against him, (2) that the criminal proceedings terminated in his favor, (3) that the private person who instituted or maintained the prosecution lacked probable cause for his actions, and (4) that the action was undertaken with malice or a purpose in instituting the criminal claim other than bringing the offender to justice. [Matthews v Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Mich, 456 Mich 365, 378 ; 572 NW2d 603 (1998).] A malicious prosecution claim brought agai	3	2015–2024
Payton v. City of Detroit green michctapp · 1995 2 sentences 2024To establish a claim of malicious prosecution, a plaintiff has the burden to prove (1) that the defendant has initiated a criminal prosecution against him, (2) that the criminal proceedings terminated in his favor, (3) that the private person who instituted or maintained the prosecution lacked probable cause for his actions, and (4) that the action was undertaken with malice or a purpose in instituting the criminal claim other than bringing the offender to justice. [Matthews v Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Mich, 456 Mich 365, 378 ; 572 NW2d 603 (1998).] A malicious prosecution claim brought agai 2024To establish a claim of malicious prosecution, a plaintiff has the burden to prove (1) that the defendant has initiated a criminal prosecution against him, (2) that the criminal proceedings terminated in his favor, (3) that the private person who instituted or maintained the prosecution lacked probable cause for his actions, and (4) that the action was undertaken with malice or a purpose in instituting the criminal claim other than bringing the offender to justice. [Matthews v Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Mich, 456 Mich 365, 378 ; 572 NW2d 603 (1998).] A malicious prosecution claim brought agai	3	2014–2024
Walsh v. Taylor green michctapp · 2004 2 sentences 2015Plaintiff appears to rely on the standard for probable cause for a search or an arrest, and ignores the requirement of a malicious prosecution claim that the defendant initiated the action “with malice or a purpose in instituting the criminal claim other than bringing the offender to justice.” Walsh, 263 Mich App at 633 . 2014A person who has been legally arrested may bring an action for malicious prosecution, but is required to show that the defendant acted with malice. ... “‘[One] who instigates or participates in a lawful arrest, as for example an arrest made under a properly issued warrant by an officer charged with the duty of enforcing it, may become liable for malicious prosecution, . . . but he is not liable for false imprisonment, since no false imprisonment has occurred.’” [Citation omitted.] With respect to the elements of malicious prosecution, there is no element specifically requiring proof of an abse	2	2014–2015
King v. Arbic green michctapp · 1987 2 sentences 1998In King v. Arbic, 159 Mich.App. 452, 466 , 406 N.W.2d 852 (1987), the plaintiff filed a malicious prosecution claim against the state trooper who had signed the complaint against the defendant. 1998In King v. Arbic, 159 Mich.App. 452, 466 , 406 N.W.2d 852 (1987), the plaintiff filed a malicious prosecution claim against the state trooper who had signed the complaint against the defendant.	2	1987–1998
Friedman v. Dozorc green mich · 1981 2 sentences 2014A person who has been legally arrested may bring an action for malicious prosecution, but is required to show that the defendant acted with malice. ... “‘[One] who instigates or participates in a lawful arrest, as for example an arrest made under a properly issued warrant by an officer charged with the duty of enforcing it, may become liable for malicious prosecution, . . . but he is not liable for false imprisonment, since no false imprisonment has occurred.’” [Citation omitted.] With respect to the elements of malicious prosecution, there is no element specifically requiring proof of an abse 2014A person who has been legally arrested may bring an action for malicious prosecution, but is required to show that the defendant acted with malice. ... “‘[One] who instigates or participates in a lawful arrest, as for example an arrest made under a properly issued warrant by an officer charged with the duty of enforcing it, may become liable for malicious prosecution, . . . but he is not liable for false imprisonment, since no false imprisonment has occurred.’” [Citation omitted.] With respect to the elements of malicious prosecution, there is no element specifically requiring proof of an abse	1	2014–2014
Belt v. Ritter green michctapp · 1970 2 sentences 1998The Court of Appeals upheld the trial court's grant of summary disposition, observing that the "[d]efendant has invoked a traditional defense to malicious prosecution, namely, the defense of advice of counsel." The Court of Appeals adopted the opinion of the trial court, which recognized: In cases similar to the one we are faced with here, that legal principle reduces to the following rule: "... the only situation in which an action for malicious prosecution would properly he is where a police officer knowingly swears to false facts in a complaint, without which there is no probable cause." Be 1998The Court of Appeals upheld the trial court’s grant of summary disposition, observing that the “[defendant has invoked a traditional defense to malicious prosecution, namely, the defense of advice of counsel.” The Court of Appeals adopted the opinion of the trial court, which recognized: In cases similar to the one we are faced with here, that legal principle reduces to the following rule: “. . . the only situation in which an action for malicious prosecution would properly lie is where a police officer knowingly swears to false facts in a complaint, without which there is no probable cause.”	1	1998–1998
Blase v. Appicelli green michctapp · 1992 1 sentence 1995Id.	1	1995–1995
Camaj v. S. S. Kresge Co. green mich · 1986 2 sentences 1989Both parties focus their arguments on the applicability of Camaj v SS Kresge Co, 426 Mich 281 ; 393 NW2d 875 (1986), and whether this case comes under the limited prospective effect of its ruling defining the availability of treble damages in a malicious prosecution claim. 1989Both parties focus their arguments on the applicability of Camaj v SS Kresge Co, 426 Mich 281 ; 393 NW2d 875 (1986), and whether this case comes under the limited prospective effect of its ruling defining the availability of treble damages in a malicious prosecution claim.	1	1989–1989
Nemanich v. Long Grove Country Club Estates, Inc. green illappct · 1970 1 sentence 1988See Nemanich v Long Grove Country Club Estates, Inc, 119 Ill App 2d 169; 255 NE2d 466 (1970), in which the Illinois court reached the same conclusion. 3 Defendant Shefman asserts that the Kauffmans have not preserved for appeal the issue whether the multiplicity of lawsuits in this case amounts to a special injury.	1	1988–1988
McCann v. Michigan green mich · 1976 2 sentences 1983Affirmed. 1 The court rule governing this cause of action is GCR 1963, 757. 2 Tillman v Beard, 121 Mich 475, 477 ; 80 NW 248 (1899). 3 Hollis v Baker, 45 Mich App 666, 670 ; 207 NW2d 138 (1973); 32 Am Jur 2d, False Imprisonment, § 47, p 108; Maliniemi v Gronlund, 92 Mich 222, 227-228 ; 52 NW 627 (1892). 4 207 Mich 385, 387 ; 174 NW 138 (1919). 5 Willis v Nienow, 113 Mich App 30, 33 ; 317 NW2d 273 (1982); Layton v Quinn, 120 Mich App 708, 712 ; 328 NW2d 95 (1982). 6 McCann v Michigan, 398 Mich 65, 77 ; 247 NW2d 521 (1976); Keenan v Secretary of State, 103 Mich App 82, 84 ; 302 NW2d 602 (1981). 1983Affirmed. 1 The court rule governing this cause of action is GCR 1963, 757. 2 Tillman v Beard, 121 Mich 475, 477 ; 80 NW 248 (1899). 3 Hollis v Baker, 45 Mich App 666, 670 ; 207 NW2d 138 (1973); 32 Am Jur 2d, False Imprisonment, § 47, p 108; Maliniemi v Gronlund, 92 Mich 222, 227-228 ; 52 NW 627 (1892). 4 207 Mich 385, 387 ; 174 NW 138 (1919). 5 Willis v Nienow, 113 Mich App 30, 33 ; 317 NW2d 273 (1982); Layton v Quinn, 120 Mich App 708, 712 ; 328 NW2d 95 (1982). 6 McCann v Michigan, 398 Mich 65, 77 ; 247 NW2d 521 (1976); Keenan v Secretary of State, 103 Mich App 82, 84 ; 302 NW2d 602 (1981).	1	1983–1983
Maliniemi v. Gronlund green mich · 1892 2 sentences 1983Affirmed. 1 The court rule governing this cause of action is GCR 1963, 757. 2 Tillman v Beard, 121 Mich 475, 477 ; 80 NW 248 (1899). 3 Hollis v Baker, 45 Mich App 666, 670 ; 207 NW2d 138 (1973); 32 Am Jur 2d, False Imprisonment, § 47, p 108; Maliniemi v Gronlund, 92 Mich 222, 227-228 ; 52 NW 627 (1892). 4 207 Mich 385, 387 ; 174 NW 138 (1919). 5 Willis v Nienow, 113 Mich App 30, 33 ; 317 NW2d 273 (1982); Layton v Quinn, 120 Mich App 708, 712 ; 328 NW2d 95 (1982). 6 McCann v Michigan, 398 Mich 65, 77 ; 247 NW2d 521 (1976); Keenan v Secretary of State, 103 Mich App 82, 84 ; 302 NW2d 602 (1981). 1983Affirmed. 1 The court rule governing this cause of action is GCR 1963, 757. 2 Tillman v Beard, 121 Mich 475, 477 ; 80 NW 248 (1899). 3 Hollis v Baker, 45 Mich App 666, 670 ; 207 NW2d 138 (1973); 32 Am Jur 2d, False Imprisonment, § 47, p 108; Maliniemi v Gronlund, 92 Mich 222, 227-228 ; 52 NW 627 (1892). 4 207 Mich 385, 387 ; 174 NW 138 (1919). 5 Willis v Nienow, 113 Mich App 30, 33 ; 317 NW2d 273 (1982); Layton v Quinn, 120 Mich App 708, 712 ; 328 NW2d 95 (1982). 6 McCann v Michigan, 398 Mich 65, 77 ; 247 NW2d 521 (1976); Keenan v Secretary of State, 103 Mich App 82, 84 ; 302 NW2d 602 (1981).	1	1983–1983
Tillman v. Beard green mich · 1899 2 sentences 1983Affirmed. 1 The court rule governing this cause of action is GCR 1963, 757. 2 Tillman v Beard, 121 Mich 475, 477 ; 80 NW 248 (1899). 3 Hollis v Baker, 45 Mich App 666, 670 ; 207 NW2d 138 (1973); 32 Am Jur 2d, False Imprisonment, § 47, p 108; Maliniemi v Gronlund, 92 Mich 222, 227-228 ; 52 NW 627 (1892). 4 207 Mich 385, 387 ; 174 NW 138 (1919). 5 Willis v Nienow, 113 Mich App 30, 33 ; 317 NW2d 273 (1982); Layton v Quinn, 120 Mich App 708, 712 ; 328 NW2d 95 (1982). 6 McCann v Michigan, 398 Mich 65, 77 ; 247 NW2d 521 (1976); Keenan v Secretary of State, 103 Mich App 82, 84 ; 302 NW2d 602 (1981). 1983Affirmed. 1 The court rule governing this cause of action is GCR 1963, 757. 2 Tillman v Beard, 121 Mich 475, 477 ; 80 NW 248 (1899). 3 Hollis v Baker, 45 Mich App 666, 670 ; 207 NW2d 138 (1973); 32 Am Jur 2d, False Imprisonment, § 47, p 108; Maliniemi v Gronlund, 92 Mich 222, 227-228 ; 52 NW 627 (1892). 4 207 Mich 385, 387 ; 174 NW 138 (1919). 5 Willis v Nienow, 113 Mich App 30, 33 ; 317 NW2d 273 (1982); Layton v Quinn, 120 Mich App 708, 712 ; 328 NW2d 95 (1982). 6 McCann v Michigan, 398 Mich 65, 77 ; 247 NW2d 521 (1976); Keenan v Secretary of State, 103 Mich App 82, 84 ; 302 NW2d 602 (1981).	1	1983–1983
Hollis v. Baker neutral michctapp · 1973 2 sentences 1983Affirmed. 1 The court rule governing this cause of action is GCR 1963, 757. 2 Tillman v Beard, 121 Mich 475, 477 ; 80 NW 248 (1899). 3 Hollis v Baker, 45 Mich App 666, 670 ; 207 NW2d 138 (1973); 32 Am Jur 2d, False Imprisonment, § 47, p 108; Maliniemi v Gronlund, 92 Mich 222, 227-228 ; 52 NW 627 (1892). 4 207 Mich 385, 387 ; 174 NW 138 (1919). 5 Willis v Nienow, 113 Mich App 30, 33 ; 317 NW2d 273 (1982); Layton v Quinn, 120 Mich App 708, 712 ; 328 NW2d 95 (1982). 6 McCann v Michigan, 398 Mich 65, 77 ; 247 NW2d 521 (1976); Keenan v Secretary of State, 103 Mich App 82, 84 ; 302 NW2d 602 (1981). 1983Affirmed. 1 The court rule governing this cause of action is GCR 1963, 757. 2 Tillman v Beard, 121 Mich 475, 477 ; 80 NW 248 (1899). 3 Hollis v Baker, 45 Mich App 666, 670 ; 207 NW2d 138 (1973); 32 Am Jur 2d, False Imprisonment, § 47, p 108; Maliniemi v Gronlund, 92 Mich 222, 227-228 ; 52 NW 627 (1892). 4 207 Mich 385, 387 ; 174 NW 138 (1919). 5 Willis v Nienow, 113 Mich App 30, 33 ; 317 NW2d 273 (1982); Layton v Quinn, 120 Mich App 708, 712 ; 328 NW2d 95 (1982). 6 McCann v Michigan, 398 Mich 65, 77 ; 247 NW2d 521 (1976); Keenan v Secretary of State, 103 Mich App 82, 84 ; 302 NW2d 602 (1981).	1	1983–1983
Keenan v. Secretary of State green michctapp · 1981 2 sentences 1983Affirmed. 1 The court rule governing this cause of action is GCR 1963, 757. 2 Tillman v Beard, 121 Mich 475, 477 ; 80 NW 248 (1899). 3 Hollis v Baker, 45 Mich App 666, 670 ; 207 NW2d 138 (1973); 32 Am Jur 2d, False Imprisonment, § 47, p 108; Maliniemi v Gronlund, 92 Mich 222, 227-228 ; 52 NW 627 (1892). 4 207 Mich 385, 387 ; 174 NW 138 (1919). 5 Willis v Nienow, 113 Mich App 30, 33 ; 317 NW2d 273 (1982); Layton v Quinn, 120 Mich App 708, 712 ; 328 NW2d 95 (1982). 6 McCann v Michigan, 398 Mich 65, 77 ; 247 NW2d 521 (1976); Keenan v Secretary of State, 103 Mich App 82, 84 ; 302 NW2d 602 (1981). 1983Affirmed. 1 The court rule governing this cause of action is GCR 1963, 757. 2 Tillman v Beard, 121 Mich 475, 477 ; 80 NW 248 (1899). 3 Hollis v Baker, 45 Mich App 666, 670 ; 207 NW2d 138 (1973); 32 Am Jur 2d, False Imprisonment, § 47, p 108; Maliniemi v Gronlund, 92 Mich 222, 227-228 ; 52 NW 627 (1892). 4 207 Mich 385, 387 ; 174 NW 138 (1919). 5 Willis v Nienow, 113 Mich App 30, 33 ; 317 NW2d 273 (1982); Layton v Quinn, 120 Mich App 708, 712 ; 328 NW2d 95 (1982). 6 McCann v Michigan, 398 Mich 65, 77 ; 247 NW2d 521 (1976); Keenan v Secretary of State, 103 Mich App 82, 84 ; 302 NW2d 602 (1981).	1	1983–1983
Willis v. Nienow green michctapp · 1982 2 sentences 1983Affirmed. 1 The court rule governing this cause of action is GCR 1963, 757. 2 Tillman v Beard, 121 Mich 475, 477 ; 80 NW 248 (1899). 3 Hollis v Baker, 45 Mich App 666, 670 ; 207 NW2d 138 (1973); 32 Am Jur 2d, False Imprisonment, § 47, p 108; Maliniemi v Gronlund, 92 Mich 222, 227-228 ; 52 NW 627 (1892). 4 207 Mich 385, 387 ; 174 NW 138 (1919). 5 Willis v Nienow, 113 Mich App 30, 33 ; 317 NW2d 273 (1982); Layton v Quinn, 120 Mich App 708, 712 ; 328 NW2d 95 (1982). 6 McCann v Michigan, 398 Mich 65, 77 ; 247 NW2d 521 (1976); Keenan v Secretary of State, 103 Mich App 82, 84 ; 302 NW2d 602 (1981). 1983Affirmed. 1 The court rule governing this cause of action is GCR 1963, 757. 2 Tillman v Beard, 121 Mich 475, 477 ; 80 NW 248 (1899). 3 Hollis v Baker, 45 Mich App 666, 670 ; 207 NW2d 138 (1973); 32 Am Jur 2d, False Imprisonment, § 47, p 108; Maliniemi v Gronlund, 92 Mich 222, 227-228 ; 52 NW 627 (1892). 4 207 Mich 385, 387 ; 174 NW 138 (1919). 5 Willis v Nienow, 113 Mich App 30, 33 ; 317 NW2d 273 (1982); Layton v Quinn, 120 Mich App 708, 712 ; 328 NW2d 95 (1982). 6 McCann v Michigan, 398 Mich 65, 77 ; 247 NW2d 521 (1976); Keenan v Secretary of State, 103 Mich App 82, 84 ; 302 NW2d 602 (1981).	1	1983–1983
Layton v. Quinn green michctapp · 1982 2 sentences 1983Affirmed. 1 The court rule governing this cause of action is GCR 1963, 757. 2 Tillman v Beard, 121 Mich 475, 477 ; 80 NW 248 (1899). 3 Hollis v Baker, 45 Mich App 666, 670 ; 207 NW2d 138 (1973); 32 Am Jur 2d, False Imprisonment, § 47, p 108; Maliniemi v Gronlund, 92 Mich 222, 227-228 ; 52 NW 627 (1892). 4 207 Mich 385, 387 ; 174 NW 138 (1919). 5 Willis v Nienow, 113 Mich App 30, 33 ; 317 NW2d 273 (1982); Layton v Quinn, 120 Mich App 708, 712 ; 328 NW2d 95 (1982). 6 McCann v Michigan, 398 Mich 65, 77 ; 247 NW2d 521 (1976); Keenan v Secretary of State, 103 Mich App 82, 84 ; 302 NW2d 602 (1981). 1983Affirmed. 1 The court rule governing this cause of action is GCR 1963, 757. 2 Tillman v Beard, 121 Mich 475, 477 ; 80 NW 248 (1899). 3 Hollis v Baker, 45 Mich App 666, 670 ; 207 NW2d 138 (1973); 32 Am Jur 2d, False Imprisonment, § 47, p 108; Maliniemi v Gronlund, 92 Mich 222, 227-228 ; 52 NW 627 (1892). 4 207 Mich 385, 387 ; 174 NW 138 (1919). 5 Willis v Nienow, 113 Mich App 30, 33 ; 317 NW2d 273 (1982); Layton v Quinn, 120 Mich App 708, 712 ; 328 NW2d 95 (1982). 6 McCann v Michigan, 398 Mich 65, 77 ; 247 NW2d 521 (1976); Keenan v Secretary of State, 103 Mich App 82, 84 ; 302 NW2d 602 (1981).	1	1983–1983
Rupright v. Muskegon Circuit Judge green mich · 1919 2 sentences 1983Affirmed. 1 The court rule governing this cause of action is GCR 1963, 757. 2 Tillman v Beard, 121 Mich 475, 477 ; 80 NW 248 (1899). 3 Hollis v Baker, 45 Mich App 666, 670 ; 207 NW2d 138 (1973); 32 Am Jur 2d, False Imprisonment, § 47, p 108; Maliniemi v Gronlund, 92 Mich 222, 227-228 ; 52 NW 627 (1892). 4 207 Mich 385, 387 ; 174 NW 138 (1919). 5 Willis v Nienow, 113 Mich App 30, 33 ; 317 NW2d 273 (1982); Layton v Quinn, 120 Mich App 708, 712 ; 328 NW2d 95 (1982). 6 McCann v Michigan, 398 Mich 65, 77 ; 247 NW2d 521 (1976); Keenan v Secretary of State, 103 Mich App 82, 84 ; 302 NW2d 602 (1981). 1983Affirmed. 1 The court rule governing this cause of action is GCR 1963, 757. 2 Tillman v Beard, 121 Mich 475, 477 ; 80 NW 248 (1899). 3 Hollis v Baker, 45 Mich App 666, 670 ; 207 NW2d 138 (1973); 32 Am Jur 2d, False Imprisonment, § 47, p 108; Maliniemi v Gronlund, 92 Mich 222, 227-228 ; 52 NW 627 (1892). 4 207 Mich 385, 387 ; 174 NW 138 (1919). 5 Willis v Nienow, 113 Mich App 30, 33 ; 317 NW2d 273 (1982); Layton v Quinn, 120 Mich App 708, 712 ; 328 NW2d 95 (1982). 6 McCann v Michigan, 398 Mich 65, 77 ; 247 NW2d 521 (1976); Keenan v Secretary of State, 103 Mich App 82, 84 ; 302 NW2d 602 (1981).	1	1983–1983
Lucas v. Hamm green cal · 1961 1 sentence 1978Cf. Lucas v Hamm, 56 Cal 2d 583; 15 Cal Rptr 821; 364 P2d 685 (1961), and Parnell v Smart, 66 Cal App 3d 833; 136 Cal Rptr 246 (1977).	1	1978–1978

Statutes the citing opinions construe

MI § Mich. Comp. Laws § 691.1407 (8) MI § Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.81d (3)

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.

Where else courts name it

CA 264 (1979–2026) TX 102 (1982–2026) NY 93 (1978–2025) IL 60 (1992–2026) OH 56 (1986–2026) AL 36 (1983–2025) NC 35 (1984–2021) FL 31 (1982–2026) NJ 28 (1982–2026) MS 25 (1992–2023) TN 24 (1997–2025) LA 23 (1983–2025) GA 21 (1983–2026) IN 19 (1980–2025) MI 17 (1978–2024) MD 16 (1972–2024) MO 16 (1987–2024) WA 15 (1989–2018) MT 15 (1980–2025) AZ 14 (1975–2026) KY 14 (2001–2025) PA 14 (1977–2023) IA 11 (1980–2023) HI 11 (1998–2024) OR 10 (1994–2025) OK 10 (1993–2022) CO 9 (1990–2025) WV 9 (1995–2024) VA 9 (1980–2025) NV 8 (2002–2020) VT 8 (1986–2026) MA 8 (1979–2010) CT 8 (1999–2024) SC 7 (2007–2022) DE 7 (2017–2024) NM 7 (1994–2015) DC 7 (1980–2022) KS 7 (1994–2026) AR 6 (1996–2023) ID 6 (1987–2022) RI 6 (1979–2008) AK 5 (1981–2025) WI 5 (1981–2026) UT 4 (1991–2013) NH 4 (1995–2019) WY 3 (1990–2024) MN 3 (1986–2017) ME 2 (1997–2000)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check