8 Michigan opinions name it 1 courts 1999–2026 4 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 |
|---|---|---|
People v. Vaughngreen2 sentences2018With respect to the third prong, the Court observed that violation of the right to public trial was a structural error and “intrinsically harmful, without regard to [its] effect on the outcome . . . .” Id. at 666 . 2018However, the Court emphasized that under the plain-error standard, the defendant should be granted a new trial only if the error “resulted in the conviction of an actually innocent defendant or seriously affected the fairness, integrity, or public reputation of judicial proceedings.” Id. at 666-667 (quotation marks and citation omitted). | 1 | 1 |
Washington Mutual Bank, FA v. Shorebank Corp.green1 sentence2011See id. at 126-127 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Michigan. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
City of Holland v. Consumers Energy Company
green
1 sentence2026Consumers there relied on Rule 411(11) for its contention, but this Court observed that the rule “does not expand the definition of ‘customer’ in Rule 411(1)(a), let alone the definition in MCL 124.3,” but rather “is a separate provision that defines the scope of what the first utility may serve,” which “distinctly states that the utility may serve the premises of the customer” while not including “premises” within the definition of “customer.” City of Holland, 308 Mich App at 697 . | 1 | 2026–2026 |
Dumas v. Auto Club Ins. Ass'n
green
1 sentence2023However, in Dumas, the Court observed that the doctrine of part performance has been limited to transactions involving land, and that its past decisions had “declined to recognize that the part performance doctrine operates to remove a contract from the statute of frauds section concerning contracts not to be performed within a year.” Dumas, id. -10- at 540-541, citing Ordon v Johnson, 346 Mich 38, 46 ; 77 NW2d 377 (1956), and Whipple v Parker, 29 Mich 369 (1874). | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Schmidt v. Genesee County Clerk
green
1 sentence2023This Court observed that the requirement that the date be written by the signer “directly eliminate[d] serious potential for fraud.” Id. | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Whipple v. Parker
green
1 sentence2023However, in Dumas, the Court observed that the doctrine of part performance has been limited to transactions involving land, and that its past decisions had “declined to recognize that the part performance doctrine operates to remove a contract from the statute of frauds section concerning contracts not to be performed within a year.” Dumas, id. -10- at 540-541, citing Ordon v Johnson, 346 Mich 38, 46 ; 77 NW2d 377 (1956), and Whipple v Parker, 29 Mich 369 (1874). | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Ordon v. Johnson
green
2 sentences2023However, in Dumas, the Court observed that the doctrine of part performance has been limited to transactions involving land, and that its past decisions had “declined to recognize that the part performance doctrine operates to remove a contract from the statute of frauds section concerning contracts not to be performed within a year.” Dumas, id. -10- at 540-541, citing Ordon v Johnson, 346 Mich 38, 46 ; 77 NW2d 377 (1956), and Whipple v Parker, 29 Mich 369 (1874). 2023However, in Dumas, the Court observed that the doctrine of part performance has been limited to transactions involving land, and that its past decisions had “declined to recognize that the part performance doctrine operates to remove a contract from the statute of frauds section concerning contracts not to be performed within a year.” Dumas, id. -10- at 540-541, citing Ordon v Johnson, 346 Mich 38, 46 ; 77 NW2d 377 (1956), and Whipple v Parker, 29 Mich 369 (1874). | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Roseville Community School District v. Roseville Federation of Teachers
green
2 sentences2022In Roseville Community Sch Dist v Roseville Federation of Teachers, 137 Mich App 118, 122 ; 357 NW2d 829 (1984), this Court observed that the analysis in Gavin had “a complete lack of reference to cases involving collective bargaining or traditional labor arbitration.” This Court found “no language in Gavin which indicates either a departure from the existing standard of judicial review of a labor arbitration award or an intent to broaden its scope.” Id. 2022In Roseville Community Sch Dist v Roseville Federation of Teachers, 137 Mich App 118, 122 ; 357 NW2d 829 (1984), this Court observed that the analysis in Gavin had “a complete lack of reference to cases involving collective bargaining or traditional labor arbitration.” This Court found “no language in Gavin which indicates either a departure from the existing standard of judicial review of a labor arbitration award or an intent to broaden its scope.” Id. | 1 | 2022–2022 |
In Re Forfeiture of Certain Personal Property
neutral
2 sentences2007Id. at 85 . 2007Id. at 85 , 490 N.W.2d 322 . | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Adkins v. Thomas Solvent Co.
green
1 sentence1999In discussing the historical development of nuisance law, the Court observed that the doctrine of nuisance evolved from that of trespass, id. at 307-308 , and recognized that traditionally in cases of trespass damage was presumed whereas in nuisance substantial damage had to be proved: *66 “Any intentional and unprivileged entry on land is a trespass without a showing of damage, since those who own land have an exclusive right to its use; but an act that interferes with use but is not in itself a use is not actionable without damage. | 1 | 1999–1999 |
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.