8 Michigan opinions name it 2 courts 1988–2024 5 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 |
|---|---|---|
Frierson v. West American Ins. Co.green2 sentences2022Under MCL 500.3114(5)(a) and (b), the insurer of the owner of that automobile was the highest-priority insurer and the insurer of the operator of the automobile was the next highest, but because of the hit-and- run nature of the accident no information was known, or knowable, about those insurers, id. at 736-737, and the Court held that the priority analysis would proceed to insurers further down the list of priority, id. at 738. 2022Under MCL 500.3114(5)(a) and (b), the insurer of the owner of that automobile was the highest-priority insurer and the insurer of the operator of the automobile was the next highest, but because of the hit-and- run nature of the accident no information was known, or knowable, about those insurers, id. at 736-737, and the Court held that the priority analysis would proceed to insurers further down the list of priority, id. at 738. | 3 | 3 |
In re DeCoste Estategreen2 sentences2024See In re DeCoste Estate, 317 Mich App 339, 353-354 ; 894 NW2d 685 (2016) (citing MCL 700.3805(1) to advance, “appellants had the duty to settle and distribute the [decedent’s] estate in accordance with EPIC, which requires payment of the costs and expenses of administration”); see also In re Lundy Estate, 291 Mich App at 356 (in examining the proper priority of the challenged claims against the decedent’s estate noted, “MCL 700.3805 sets forth the priority of claim payments”). 2024See In re DeCoste Estate, 317 Mich App 339, 353-354 ; 894 NW2d 685 (2016) (citing MCL 700.3805(1) to advance, “appellants had the duty to settle and distribute the [decedent’s] estate in accordance with EPIC, which requires payment of the costs and expenses of administration”); see also In re Lundy Estate, 291 Mich App at 356 (in examining the proper priority of the challenged claims against the decedent’s estate noted, “MCL 700.3805 sets forth the priority of claim payments”). | 2 | 2 |
In re Lundy Estategreen2 sentences2024See In re DeCoste Estate, 317 Mich App 339, 353-354 ; 894 NW2d 685 (2016) (citing MCL 700.3805(1) to advance, “appellants had the duty to settle and distribute the [decedent’s] estate in accordance with EPIC, which requires payment of the costs and expenses of administration”); see also In re Lundy Estate, 291 Mich App at 356 (in examining the proper priority of the challenged claims against the decedent’s estate noted, “MCL 700.3805 sets forth the priority of claim payments”). 2024See In re DeCoste Estate, 317 Mich App 339, 353-354 ; 894 NW2d 685 (2016) (citing MCL 700.3805(1) to advance, “appellants had the duty to settle and distribute the [decedent’s] estate in accordance with EPIC, which requires payment of the costs and expenses of administration”); see also In re Lundy Estate, 291 Mich App at 356 (in examining the proper priority of the challenged claims against the decedent’s estate noted, “MCL 700.3805 sets forth the priority of claim payments”). | 2 | 2 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Michigan. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Parks v. Detroit Automobile Inter-Insurance Exchange
green
2 sentences2017Parks, 426 Mich at 203 n 3. 2017Parks, 426 Mich at 203 n 3. | 2 | 2017–2017 |
Princess Lida of Thurn and Taxis v. Thompson
green
2 sentences1988On the other hand, if the two suits are in rem or quasi in rem, so that the court or its officer has possession or must have control of the property which is the subject of the litigation in order to proceed with the cause and grant the relief sought the jurisdiction of the one court must yield to that of the other. [Princess Lida of Thurn & Taxis v Thompson, 305 US 456, 466 ; 59 S Ct 275 ; 83 L Ed 285 (1939). 1988On the other hand, if the two suits are in rem or quasi in rem, so that the court or its officer has possession or must have control of the property which is the subject of the litigation in order to proceed with the cause and grant the relief sought the jurisdiction of the one court must yield to that of the other. [Princess Lida of Thurn & Taxis v Thompson, 305 US 456, 466 ; 59 S Ct 275 ; 83 L Ed 285 (1939). | 1 | 1988–1988 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
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.