8 Michigan opinions name it 2 courts 1945–2011 0 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 |
|---|---|---|
Williams v. CHAVEZ-WILLIAMSgreen2 sentences2011Anglers of the AuSable, Inc v Dep’t of Environmental Quality, 486 Mich 982, 994 (2010) (YOUNG, J., dissenting). 2010Nevertheless, a majority of this Court denied Merit’s motion to dismiss for mootness on June 18, 2010. 19 17 Mich Citizens for Water Conservation v Nestlé Waters North America Inc, 479 Mich 280 ; 737 NW2d 447 (2007). 18 Anglers of the AuSable, Inc v Dep’t of Environmental Quality, 485 Mich 1067 (2010) (citations omitted). 19 Anglers, 486 Mich 982 . 7 II. | 1 | 2 |
Newark Morning Ledger Co. v. Saginaw County Sheriffgreen2 sentences1995See generally Newark Morning Ledger Co v Saginaw Co Sheriff, 204 Mich App 215 ; 514 NW2d 213 (1994). [6] In addressing this argument in plaintiff's prior appeal, this Court held: Plaintiff claims that the arbitration award violates public policy because, in effect, he was being punished for failing to gain entry to Heaps' house. 1995See generally Newark Morning Ledger Co v Saginaw Co Sheriff, 204 Mich App 215 ; 514 NW2d 213 (1994). [6] In addressing this argument in plaintiff's prior appeal, this Court held: Plaintiff claims that the arbitration award violates public policy because, in effect, he was being punished for failing to gain entry to Heaps' house. | 1 | 1 |
Bays v. Department of State Policegreen2 sentences1995See Bays v Dep’t of State Police, 89 Mich App 356, 359-360 ; 280 NW2d 526 (1979). 1995See Bays v Dep’t of State Police, 89 Mich App 356, 359-360 ; 280 NW2d 526 (1979). | 1 | 1 |
People v. Allengreen2 sentences1988However, in light of the unrebutted evidence introduced by the defendant on that point, .. . as well as the overwhelming evidence of guilt, we agree with the Court of Appeals that the error, if any, was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. [ 418 Mich 117 -118.] The failure of the defendant to testify neither precluded us from considering the merit of his claim of error nor from rejecting it as being harmless. *544 See also our review of defendant Smith's claim in People v Allen, supra, 612 . 1988See also our review of defendant Smith’s claim in People v Allen, supra, 612 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Michigan. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
People v. Garcia
green
2 sentences1982People v Garcia, 398 Mich 250 ; 247 NW2d 547 (1976). 1982People v Garcia, 398 Mich 250 ; 247 NW2d 547 (1976). | 2 | 1981–1982 |
City of Erie v. Pap's A. M.
green
1 sentence2011City of Erie, 529 US at 284 -288 and 302-303, Scalia, J., concurring. 10 See also Anglers of the Au Sable, 486 Mich at 986, n 6 (CORRIGAN, J., dissenting), and id. at 989, n 10 (YOUNG, J., dissenting) persuasively distinguishing City of Erie from the instant case. 8 statement and the three “emphatic[]” dissenting statements to this Court’s June 18, 2010 order denying defendant Merit’s motion to dismiss for mootness. | 1 | 2011–2011 |
Street Railroad v. Wildman
green
1 sentence2010Nor are courts of equity established to decide or declare abstract questions of right for the future guidance of suitors.[44] 44 Street R Co, 58 Mich at 287 . 16 In their brief opposing Merit’s motion to dismiss, plaintiffs claimed that this case fits into an exception to the mootness doctrine, that “the issue is one of public significance that is likely to recur, yet evade judicial review.” 45 Not so. | 1 | 2010–2010 |
Michigan Citizens for Water Conservation v. Nestlé Waters North America Inc
green
2 sentences2010Nevertheless, a majority of this Court denied Merit’s motion to dismiss for mootness on June 18, 2010. 19 17 Mich Citizens for Water Conservation v Nestlé Waters North America Inc, 479 Mich 280 ; 737 NW2d 447 (2007). 18 Anglers of the AuSable, Inc v Dep’t of Environmental Quality, 485 Mich 1067 (2010) (citations omitted). 19 Anglers, 486 Mich 982 . 7 II. 2010Nevertheless, a majority of this Court denied Merit’s motion to dismiss for mootness on June 18, 2010. 19 17 Mich Citizens for Water Conservation v Nestlé Waters North America Inc, 479 Mich 280 ; 737 NW2d 447 (2007). 18 Anglers of the AuSable, Inc v Dep’t of Environmental Quality, 485 Mich 1067 (2010) (citations omitted). 19 Anglers, 486 Mich 982 . 7 II. | 1 | 2010–2010 |
In Re Schnitzer
green
1 sentence1945In re Schnitzer, 295 Mich. 736 . | 1 | 1945–1945 |
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.