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.
8 Michigan opinions name it 2 courts 1925–2022 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 |
|---|---|---|
| No positive-treatment citations attached to this issue in Michigan. | ||
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Michigan. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Plaza Investment Co. v. Abel
green
2 sentences2022In support of this argument, plaintiff cites this Court’s prior statement that “[a] covenant to keep in repair throughout the term of the lease is capable of constant or continuous breach and, thus, the fact that damages have been recovered for a breach of such a covenant will not bar a second suit seeking damages suffered from the continuing breach since the last recovery.” Plaza Investment Co v Abel, 8 Mich App 19, 27 ; 153 NW2d 379 (1967) (emphasis added). 2022In support of this argument, plaintiff cites this Court’s prior statement that “[a] covenant to keep in repair throughout the term of the lease is capable of constant or continuous breach and, thus, the fact that damages have been recovered for a breach of such a covenant will not bar a second suit seeking damages suffered from the continuing breach since the last recovery.” Plaza Investment Co v Abel, 8 Mich App 19, 27 ; 153 NW2d 379 (1967) (emphasis added). | 3 | 2018–2022 |
Vhs Huron Valley Sinai Hospital v. Sentinel Insurance Company
green
2 sentences2019Cameron 9 In any event, Auto-Owners is also entitled to judgment as a matter of law with regard to the medical providers’ claims under a retroactive application of Covenant Med Ctr, Inc v State Farm Mut Auto Ins Co, 500 Mich 191 ; 895 NW2d 490 (2017), which is appropriate here because Auto- Owners preserved the Covenant issue in the trial court, VHS Huron Valley Sinai Hosp v Sentinel Ins Co, 322 Mich App 707, 714 ; 916 NW2d 218 (2018), lv pending. 10 Because Auto-Owners was not liable to pay no-fault benefits to plaintiff or Get Well, the trial court erred by awarding these parties no-fault sa 2019Cameron 9 In any event, Auto-Owners is also entitled to judgment as a matter of law with regard to the medical providers’ claims under a retroactive application of Covenant Med Ctr, Inc v State Farm Mut Auto Ins Co, 500 Mich 191 ; 895 NW2d 490 (2017), which is appropriate here because Auto- Owners preserved the Covenant issue in the trial court, VHS Huron Valley Sinai Hosp v Sentinel Ins Co, 322 Mich App 707, 714 ; 916 NW2d 218 (2018), lv pending. 10 Because Auto-Owners was not liable to pay no-fault benefits to plaintiff or Get Well, the trial court erred by awarding these parties no-fault sa | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Bank of America Na v. Fidelity National Title Insurance Company
green
1 sentence2018A genuine issue of material fact exists when the record, giving the benefit of reasonable doubt to the opposing party, leaves open an issue upon which reasonable minds might differ. [Bank of America, NA v Fidelity Nat’l Title Ins Co, 316 Mich App 480, 488 ; 892 NW2d 467 (2016) (quotation marks and citations omitted).] With respect to the Covenant issue raised by defendant regarding the claims of the medical providers, review is proper under MCR 2.116(C)(8). | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Cooper v. Kovan
green
1 sentence1997Id. at 531-532 . | 1 | 1997–1997 |
Beach v. . Crain
green
1 sentence1993Beach v. Crain (1848), 2 NY 86 ; Block v. Ebner (1876), 54 Ind 544, 548; 2 McAdam, Landlord and Tenant (5th ed, 1934), p 1325; Foa, The Law of Landlord and Tenant (5th ed, 1914), p 216. | 1 | 1993–1993 |
Marvin v. Hartz
green
1 sentence1925Wray-Austin Machinery Co. v. Flower, 140 Mich. 452 ; Miller v. Havens, 51 Mich. 485 ; Marvin v. Hartz, 130 Mich. 26 . | 1 | 1925–1925 |
Wray-Austin Machinery Co. v. Flower
neutral
1 sentence1925Wray-Austin Machinery Co. v. Flower, 140 Mich. 452 ; Miller v. Havens, 51 Mich. 485 ; Marvin v. Hartz, 130 Mich. 26 . | 1 | 1925–1925 |
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.