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.
10 Michigan opinions name it 2 courts 1896–2024 1 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 |
|---|---|---|
AFT Michigan v. Michigangreen1 sentence2016See AFT Michigan, 303 Mich App at 660 . | 1 | 1 |
Peterson v. Fertelgreen2 sentences2015See Peterson v Fertel, 283 Mich App 232, 235-236 ; 770 NW2d 47 (2009). 2015See Peterson v Fertel, 283 Mich App 232, 235-236 ; 770 NW2d 47 (2009). | 1 | 1 |
People v. Reagangreen2 sentences1999Although we recognize that a prosecutor and a witness might agree to supplement the basic statutory immunity with additional provisions and conditions, People v. Reagan, 395 Mich. 306, 318 , 235 N.W.2d 581 (1975), in this case we are not faced with that situation, but are referred back to the statute, because the circumstances indicate clearly that immunity was granted only pursuant to M.C.L. § 767.6; MSA 28.946. 1999Although we recognize that a prosecutor and a witness might agree to supplement the basic statutory immunity with additional provisions and conditions, People v. Reagan, 395 Mich. 306, 318 , 235 N.W.2d 581 (1975), in this case we are not faced with that situation, but are referred back to the statute, because the circumstances indicate clearly that immunity was granted only pursuant to M.C.L. § 767.6; MSA 28.946. | 1 | 1 |
Jordan v. Department of Correctionsgreen1 sentence1993See also Jordan, supra at 29 (holding that a policy directive was invalid because it affected "the rights of the public, and changed, rather than merely explained, the terms of the rule it purported to interpret”); Schinzel, supra at 220-221 (holding a rule invalid because it altered the statutory definition of the authority on which it was based). | 1 | 1 |
Schinzel v. Department of Correctionsgreen1 sentence1993See also Jordan, supra at 29 (holding that a policy directive was invalid because it affected "the rights of the public, and changed, rather than merely explained, the terms of the rule it purported to interpret”); Schinzel, supra at 220-221 (holding a rule invalid because it altered the statutory definition of the authority on which it was based). | 1 | 1 |
Detroit Base Coalition for the Human Rights of the Handicapped v. Department of Social Servicesgreen1 sentence1993In Coalition for Human Rights, supra at 188-189, this Court held that an administrative policy directive that was "binding and affect[ed] the rights of the public” was an invalidly promulgated rule: The new procedures are not merely mechanical details for the conduct of hearings, but, rather, represent substantial changes in the detailed requirements for the conduct of fair hearings to determine claimants’ rights under the Social Welfare Act and applicable federal law. . . . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Michigan. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Bishopp v. Lane
neutral
2 sentences1902In the case of Maynard v. Eaton Circuit Judge, 108 Mich. 202 ( 65 N. W. 760 ), cited in support of respondent’s action, it was said: “We held in Bishopp v. Hillsdale Circuit Judge, 94 Mich. 461 ( 53 N. W. 1093 ), that a druggist might properly be informed against under this section for selling liquor, if the information negatived the terms of the exception. 1902In the case of Maynard v. Eaton Circuit Judge, 108 Mich. 202 ( 65 N. W. 760 ), cited in support of respondent’s action, it was said: “We held in Bishopp v. Hillsdale Circuit Judge, 94 Mich. 461 ( 53 N. W. 1093 ), that a druggist might properly be informed against under this section for selling liquor, if the information negatived the terms of the exception. | 2 | 1896–1902 |
United States v. Mottaz
green
2 sentences2024“When the United States consents to be sued, the terms of its waiver of sovereign immunity define the extent of the court’s jurisdiction.” United States v Mottaz, 476 US 834, 841 ; 106 S Ct 2224 ; 90 L Ed 2d 841 (1986). 2024“When the United States consents to be sued, the terms of its waiver of sovereign immunity define the extent of the court’s jurisdiction.” United States v Mottaz, 476 US 834, 841 ; 106 S Ct 2224 ; 90 L Ed 2d 841 (1986). | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Rhode Island v. Innis
green
1 sentence2011Innis, 446 US at 302 . | 1 | 2011–2011 |
William S. Merrell Chemical Co. v. Root
neutral
1 sentence1921It is no straining of language to hold that the term ‘person to whom the instrument is presented for payment’ includes a person to whom the instrument would have to be presented if he had not both as maker and as indorser waived such presentment.” Substantially the same question arose in William S. Merrill Chemical Co. v. Root, 152 N. Y. | 1 | 1921–1921 |
Westinghouse Electric & Manufacturing Co. v. Hodge
green
1 sentence1921Co. v. Hodge, 181 Mo. App. 282 ( 167 S. W. 1186 ). 2. | 1 | 1921–1921 |
Slocovich v. Orient Mutual Insurance
green
2 sentences1903“The general rule is well expressed by Earl, J., in Slocovich v. Insurance Company, 108 N. Y. 56 ( 14 N. E. 802 ): “ ‘Where there is an. insurance against a loss by fire, and it is proved or admitted that the property insured has been destroyed by fire, the loss is brought literally and exactly within the terms of the policy. 1903“The general rule is well expressed by Earl, J., in Slocovich v. Insurance Company, 108 N. Y. 56 ( 14 N. E. 802 ): “ ‘Where there is an. insurance against a loss by fire, and it is proved or admitted that the property insured has been destroyed by fire, the loss is brought literally and exactly within the terms of the policy. | 1 | 1903–1903 |
Maynard v. Circuit Judge
neutral
1 sentence1902In the case of Maynard v. Eaton Circuit Judge, 108 Mich. 202 ( 65 N. W. 760 ), cited in support of respondent’s action, it was said: “We held in Bishopp v. Hillsdale Circuit Judge, 94 Mich. 461 ( 53 N. W. 1093 ), that a druggist might properly be informed against under this section for selling liquor, if the information negatived the terms of the exception. | 1 | 1902–1902 |
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.