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.
12 Michigan opinions name it 2 courts 1966–2024 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.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Madar v. League General Insuracegreen2 sentences2023Id. (“It is clear that the policy behind this principle is to prevent an insurer from retroactively cancelling coverage on a date prior to the date of the accident in order to shift liability to another insurer under the priority provisions of the no-fault act.”). 14 Clevenger added nothing to the analysis, simply citing the Court of Appeals caselaw. 2023Id. (“It is clear that the policy behind this principle is to prevent an insurer from retroactively cancelling coverage on a date prior to the date of the accident in order to shift liability to another insurer under the priority provisions of the no-fault act.”). 14 Clevenger added nothing to the analysis, simply citing the Court of Appeals caselaw. | 2 | 2 |
Dodge v. Northropgreen2 sentences2007In addition, such a rule tends to preserve the dignity and stability of judicial action by preventing unhappy litigants from turning to other trial judges to have the judgment “reversed” and by preventing “judge shopping.” [Citation omitted.] See, also, Dodge v Northrop, 85 Mich 243, 245 ; 48 NW 505 (1891) (“Courts of concurrent jurisdiction cannot set aside or modify the orders and decrees of other courts of like jurisdiction.”). 2007In addition, such a rule tends to preserve the dignity and stability of judicial action by preventing unhappy litigants from turning to other trial judges to have the judgment “reversed” and by preventing “judge shopping.” [Citation omitted.] See, also, Dodge v Northrop, 85 Mich 243, 245 ; 48 NW 505 (1891) (“Courts of concurrent jurisdiction cannot set aside or modify the orders and decrees of other courts of like jurisdiction.”). | 1 | 1 |
People v. Grishamgreen2 sentences1993See People v Grisham, 125 Mich App 280, 284 ; 335 NW2d 680 (1983); People v Johnston, 76 Mich App 332, 334-336 ; 256 NW2d 782 (1977). v Defendant had sought to introduce evidence of two alleged false accusations of rape made by the complainant. 1993See People v Grisham, 125 Mich App 280, 284 ; 335 NW2d 680 (1983); People v Johnston, 76 Mich App 332, 334-336 ; 256 NW2d 782 (1977). v Defendant had sought to introduce evidence of two alleged false accusations of rape made by the complainant. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Michigan. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Huber v. Frankenmuth Mutual Insurance
green
2 sentences2024This Court discussed the purpose of this rule and its predecessor in Huber v Frankenmuth Mut Ins Co, 160 Mich App 568, 573 ; 408 NW2d 505 (1987), recognizing: The policy behind the rule requiring litigants to appear before the judge who made the judgment or order is that the original judge is best qualified to rule on the matter. 2024This Court discussed the purpose of this rule and its predecessor in Huber v Frankenmuth Mut Ins Co, 160 Mich App 568, 573 ; 408 NW2d 505 (1987), recognizing: The policy behind the rule requiring litigants to appear before the judge who made the judgment or order is that the original judge is best qualified to rule on the matter. | 2 | 2007–2024 |
Martin v. Children's Aid Society
green
1 sentence2006Id. at 98-99 . | 1 | 2006–2006 |
Neibarger v. Universal Coopertives, Inc.
green
1 sentence1995This holding reflects the rule adopted by our Supreme Court in Neibarger, supra. The Florida Power court explained that the policy behind the doctrine "encourages parties to negotiate economic risks through warranty provisions and price.” 510 So 2d 901. | 1 | 1995–1995 |
Local Joint Exec. Bd. of Las Vegas v. Stern
green
1 sentence1995Another Florida court noted that the doctrine "shield[s] a defendant from unlimited liability for all economic consequences of a negligent act, particularly in a commercial setting, thus keeping the risk of liability reasonably calculable.” Bay Garden Manor Condominium Ass’n, Inc v James D Marks Associates, Inc, 576 So 2d 744, 745 (Fla App, 1991), citing Local Joint Exec Bd, Culinary Workers Union, Local 226 v Stern, 98 Nev 409, 410; 651 P2d 637 (1982). | 1 | 1995–1995 |
People v. Johnston
green
2 sentences1993See People v Grisham, 125 Mich App 280, 284 ; 335 NW2d 680 (1983); People v Johnston, 76 Mich App 332, 334-336 ; 256 NW2d 782 (1977). v Defendant had sought to introduce evidence of two alleged false accusations of rape made by the complainant. 1993See People v Grisham, 125 Mich App 280, 284 ; 335 NW2d 680 (1983); People v Johnston, 76 Mich App 332, 334-336 ; 256 NW2d 782 (1977). v Defendant had sought to introduce evidence of two alleged false accusations of rape made by the complainant. | 1 | 1993–1993 |
Hoffman v. Monroe Public Schools
green
2 sentences1992Id. at 258 ; Heintz v Akbar, 161 Mich App 533, 540 ; 411 NW2d 736 (1987). 1992After that point, oral testimony or affidavits by the jurors may only be received on extraneous or outside errors (such as undue influence by outside parties), or to correct clerical errors in matters of form.... *294 We carve out an exception for clerical errors since, presumably, the correct information will already exist on the record and it will merely be a matter of conforming the written judgment to the earlier in-court statements; no invasion of the juror's room or minds will be necessitated. [ Id. at 260-261 .] The policy behind this rule protects both the finality attached to judgment | 1 | 1992–1992 |
Heintz v. Akbar
green
2 sentences1992Id. at 258 ; Heintz v Akbar, 161 Mich App 533, 540 ; 411 NW2d 736 (1987). 1992Id. at 258 ; Heintz v Akbar, 161 Mich App 533, 540 ; 411 NW2d 736 (1987). | 1 | 1992–1992 |
American Way Service Corp. v. Commissioner of Insurance
green
1 sentence1987In addition, such a rule tends to preserve the dignity and stability of judicial action by preventing unhappy litigants from turning to other trial judges to have the judgment "reversed” and by preventing "judge shopping.” Id. | 1 | 1987–1987 |
Castle v. Lockwood-MacDonald Hospital
green
1 sentence1986Castle, supra, p 604 . | 1 | 1986–1986 |
Pelkey v. Elsea Realty & Investment Co.
green
2 sentences1978The policy behind this requirement of reimbursement was discussed by the Supreme Court in Pelkey v Elsea Realty & Investment Co, 394 Mich 485 ; 232 NW2d 154 (1975). 1978The policy behind this requirement of reimbursement was discussed by the Supreme Court in Pelkey v Elsea Realty & Investment Co, 394 Mich 485 ; 232 NW2d 154 (1975). | 1 | 1978–1978 |
Emery v. Emery
green
1 sentence1966“Preservation of the parent’s right to discipline his minor children has been the basic policy behind the rule of parental immunity from tort liability.” Emery v. Emery (1955) 45 Cal 2d 421, 429 ( 289 P2d 218, 223 ). | 1 | 1966–1966 |
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.