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.
11 Michigan opinions name it 1 courts 2009–2026 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 |
|---|---|---|
People v. Ratliffgreen2 sentences2021Summary disposition is appropriate under MCR 2.116(I)(1) “[i]f the pleadings show that a party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law, or if the affidavits or other proofs show that there is no genuine issue of material fact.” “Under this rule, a trial court has the authority to grant summary disposition sua sponte, as long as one of the two conditions of the rule is satisfied.” Al- Maliki v LaGrant, 286 Mich App 483, 485 ; 781 NW2d 853 (2009). 2021Under MCR 2.116(I)(1), “[i]f the pleadings show that a party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law, or if the affidavits or other proofs show that there is no genuine issue of material fact, the court shall render judgment without delay.” Thus, “[u]nder this rule, a trial court has authority to grant summary disposition sua sponte, as long as one of the two conditions in the rule is satisfied.” Al-Maliki v LaGrant, 286 Mich App 483, 485 ; 781 NW2d 853 (2009). | 1 | 9 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Michigan. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Al-Maliki v. LaGrant
green
2 sentences2021Summary disposition is appropriate under MCR 2.116(I)(1) “[i]f the pleadings show that a party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law, or if the affidavits or other proofs show that there is no genuine issue of material fact.” “Under this rule, a trial court has the authority to grant summary disposition sua sponte, as long as one of the two conditions of the rule is satisfied.” Al- Maliki v LaGrant, 286 Mich App 483, 485 ; 781 NW2d 853 (2009). 2021Under MCR 2.116(I)(1), “[i]f the pleadings show that a party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law, or if the affidavits or other proofs show that there is no genuine issue of material fact, the court shall render judgment without delay.” Thus, “[u]nder this rule, a trial court has authority to grant summary disposition sua sponte, as long as one of the two conditions in the rule is satisfied.” Al-Maliki v LaGrant, 286 Mich App 483, 485 ; 781 NW2d 853 (2009). | 9 | 2016–2021 |
Boulton v. Fenton Township
green
2 sentences2026Boulton v Fenton Twp, 272 Mich App 456, 462-463 ; 726 NW2d 733 (2006). -6- of all buildings, improvements, and structures on the property at Eastside Detroit Elderly LDHALP’s expense if it defaulted on any terms of the agreement. 2026Boulton v Fenton Twp, 272 Mich App 456, 462-463 ; 726 NW2d 733 (2006). -6- of all buildings, improvements, and structures on the property at Eastside Detroit Elderly LDHALP’s expense if it defaulted on any terms of the agreement. | 2 | 2009–2026 |
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.