exhaustive analysis in Michigan

1996A similar result was recently reached in In re Booth v Clary, 83 NY2d 675, 678-680 ; 613 NW2d 110 ; 635 NE2d 279 (1994).

1996A similar result was recently reached in In re Booth v Clary, 83 NY2d 675, 678-680 ; 613 NW2d 110 ; 635 NE2d 279 (1994).

1996A similar result was recently reached in In re Booth v Clary, 83 NY2d 675, 678-680 ; 613 NW2d 110 ; 635 NE2d 279 (1994).

1996In State ex rel Cobb v Mills, 82 Okla Crim 155, 184; 163 P2d 558 (1945), after an exhaustive analysis of existing case law, the Oklahoma Criminal Court of Appeals rejected the contention that a court-martial was not a “court” because of its limited and special jurisdiction and the fact that it is a part of the executive rather than the judicial branch of the federal government.

1990Moreover, Stevenson did not involve a claim of legislative adoption of the common-law rule, nor did it involve legislative acquiescence in the face of a ruling by this Court, as occurred after People v Gonsler, 251 Mich 443 ; 232 NW 365 (1930).

1990Moreover, Stevenson did not involve a claim of legislative adoption of the common-law rule, nor did it involve legislative acquiescence in the face of a ruling by this Court, as occurred after People v Gonsler, 251 Mich 443 ; 232 NW 365 (1930). [9] Perkins & Boyce, supra, p 1105. [10] Perkins & Boyce, supra, pp 1099-1100.

1983An exhaustive analysis of the issue is set forth in United States v Dougherty, 154 US App DC 76, 93-100; 473 F2d 1113, 1130-1137 (1972), cited with approval in People v Chamblis, 395 Mich 408, 426 ; 236 NW2d 473 (1975).

1983An exhaustive analysis of the issue is set forth in United States v Dougherty, 154 US App DC 76, 93-100; 473 F2d 1113, 1130-1137 (1972), cited with approval in People v Chamblis, 395 Mich 408, 426 ; 236 NW2d 473 (1975).

1982Also, see Porter v Michigan Mutual Liability Co, 80 Mich App 145 ; 263 NW2d 318 (1977).

1982Also, see Porter v Michigan Mutual Liability Co, 80 Mich App 145 ; 263 NW2d 318 (1977).

1976These cases were quoted approvingly in Prosky v National Acme Co, 404 F Supp 852 (ED Mich, 1975), in an exhaustive analysis of the present question under Michigan law.

1975The Supreme Court’s plurality opinion in United States v White, supra, involved the identical issue and set forth an exhaustive analysis of participant monitoring.

1968It is suggested, respectfully again, that all 8 Justices participating in the decision of Hills were in better position to know purposefully and apply intelligently the everlasting “out of and in the course of” test, to an “on the premises” case, than are we in this year 1968. 6 See discussion of various types of presumptions in Cebulak v. Lewis, 320 Mich 710 ; also in the exhaustive analysis provided by/ra re Wood Estate (1965), 374 Mieh 278, particularly the quotation (p 289) from Tot v. United States (1943), 319 US 463, 467, 468 ( 63 S Ct 1241, 1245 , 87 L ed 1519, 1524) : “Under our decisi

1966An exhaustive analysis of the prosecutor’s duty regarding indorsement of res gestae witnesses and its underlying rationale can be found in Kayne, supra, which was decided at a time when a statute substantially the same as CLS 1961, § 767.40, supra, was in effect.

1918“It was clearly the purpose of the testator to give to Howard Stafford the benefit of the use of said estate during his life with the power to convey and dispose of the same at or before his death, either to his child or children if any survived him, and if no child or children survived, then under the will the property shall go to the blood relations of the deceased living at the time of his death, under the rules of law governing the disposition of estates under last wills and testaments.” —and claims that this interpretation of the language of the will is warranted by our decisions in Gadd

1918“It was clearly the purpose of the testator to give to Howard Stafford the benefit of the use of said estate during his life with the power to convey and dispose of the same at or before his death, either to his child or children if any survived him, and if no child or children survived, then under the will the property shall go to the blood relations of the deceased living at the time of his death, under the rules of law governing the disposition of estates under last wills and testaments.” —and claims that this interpretation of the language of the will is warranted by our decisions in Gadd