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 1 courts 1995–2025 6 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 |
|---|---|---|
Kloian v. Domino's Pizza, LLCgreen2 sentences2025See id. 2025See id. | 1 | 1 |
Grand/Sakwa of Northfield, LLC v. Northfield Townshipgreen1 sentence2023See Grand/Sakawa of Northfield, LLC v Northfield Twp, 304 Mich App 137, 141 ; 851 NW2d 574 (2014) (The applicable law is that in effect at the time of the trial court’s decision; if a zoning ordinance is amended after suit is filed, a court will give effect to the amendment.) This is a general rule, but two exceptions to the rule exist. | 1 | 1 |
Carlisle v. Earnest C. Brooks Corr. Facility Wardengreen1 sentence2023In order “to determine that frame of reference, one must consider the context of the passage by reading it in relation to the statute as a whole and [to] work in mutual agreement with the remainder of the statute.” Id. at 300 (quotation marks and citations omitted, second alteration in original). 4 We are aware of the Township’s challenge to our appellate jurisdiction in Docket No. 360825 as an appeal of right under MCR 7.203(A)(1)(a). | 1 | 1 |
Keating International Corp. v. Orion Townshipgreen2 sentences2020See Keating Int’l Corp v Orion Twp, 395 Mich 539, 547 ; 236 NW2d 409 (1975). 2020See Keating Int’l Corp v Orion Twp, 395 Mich 539, 547 ; 236 NW2d 409 (1975). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Michigan. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Cannon Township v. Rockford Public Schools
green
2 sentences2023Id. -4- In exchange, the Macks agreed to release the township from any future liability and to “fully assign” to the township their claim “in total, including but not limited to any and all damages in excess of the Settlement Sum and including but not limited to any and all claims against [the schools] related to” the . . . event. [Id.] The parties understood that as the Macks’ assignee, the township planned to sue the schools, and that any amount recovered over $50,000 would be remitted to the Macks. 2023Id. | 2 | 2022–2023 |
Pierron v. Pierron
green
1 sentence2024The June 8, 2022 order addressed the Township’s motion for attorney fees and costs pursuant to the contract and was the “first judgment or order that disposes of all the claims and adjudicates the rights and liabilities of all the parties . . . .” MCR 7.202(6)(a)(i). “[A] party claiming an appeal of right from a final order is free to raise issues on appeal related to prior orders.” Green v Ziegelman, 282 Mich App 292 , 301 n 6; 767 NW2d 660 (2009) (quotation marks -4- and citation omitted; alteration in original). | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Green v. Ziegelman
green
1 sentence2024The June 8, 2022 order addressed the Township’s motion for attorney fees and costs pursuant to the contract and was the “first judgment or order that disposes of all the claims and adjudicates the rights and liabilities of all the parties . . . .” MCR 7.202(6)(a)(i). “[A] party claiming an appeal of right from a final order is free to raise issues on appeal related to prior orders.” Green v Ziegelman, 282 Mich App 292 , 301 n 6; 767 NW2d 660 (2009) (quotation marks -4- and citation omitted; alteration in original). | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Chen v. Wayne State University
green
2 sentences2024“Whether this Court has jurisdiction to hear an appeal is always within the scope of this Court’s review.” Chen v Wayne State Univ, 284 Mich App 172, 191 ; 771 NW2d 820 (2009). 2024“Whether this Court has jurisdiction to hear an appeal is always within the scope of this Court’s review.” Chen v Wayne State Univ, 284 Mich App 172, 191 ; 771 NW2d 820 (2009). | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Southfield Educ. Ass'n v. Bd. of Educ. of the Southfield Pub. Sch.
green
1 sentence2023Southfield Ed Ass’n, 320 Mich App at 378 . | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Lima Twp v. Bateson
green
1 sentence2019Lima Twp v Bateson, 302 Mich App 483, 491 ; 838 NW2d 898 -3- (2013). | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Webb v. Smith
green
2 sentences2015This means that although we review de novo the issuance of the injunction, Webb v Smith (After Remand), 204 Mich App 564, 568 ; 516 NW2d 124 (1994), and the applicability of the RTFA, we review the trial court’s factual findings — appropriately made under MCR 2.504(B)(2) — for clear error, id. 2015This means that although we review de novo the issuance of the injunction, Webb v Smith (After Remand), 204 Mich App 564, 568 ; 516 NW2d 124 (1994), and the applicability of the RTFA, we review the trial court’s factual findings — appropriately made under MCR 2.504(B)(2) — for clear error, id. | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Generou v. Kalamazoo Regional Psychiatric Hospital
green
2 sentences1995Id.; Generou v Kalamazoo Regional Psychiatric Hosp, 192 Mich App 295, 305 ; 480 NW2d 638 (1991). 1995Id.; Generou v Kalamazoo Regional Psychiatric Hosp, 192 Mich App 295, 305 ; 480 NW2d 638 (1991). | 1 | 1995–1995 |
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.