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.
7 Michigan opinions name it 2 courts 2000–2024 2 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 |
|---|---|---|
Arthur Duckett v. Mary C Solkygreen1 sentence2024See Duckett, 341 Mich App at 730-731, citing Ex parte Young, 209 US 123 ; 28 S Ct 441 ; 52 L Ed 714 (1908). -14- substance of a claim relates to a past decision and the plaintiff does not seek to restrain the defendants’ future conduct, the relief sought is retroactive). | 1 | 1 |
Ex Parte Youngred2 sentences2024See Duckett, 341 Mich App at 730-731, citing Ex parte Young, 209 US 123 ; 28 S Ct 441 ; 52 L Ed 714 (1908). -14- substance of a claim relates to a past decision and the plaintiff does not seek to restrain the defendants’ future conduct, the relief sought is retroactive). 2024See Duckett, 341 Mich App at 730-731, citing Ex parte Young, 209 US 123 ; 28 S Ct 441 ; 52 L Ed 714 (1908). -14- substance of a claim relates to a past decision and the plaintiff does not seek to restrain the defendants’ future conduct, the relief sought is retroactive). | 1 | 1 |
Federated Publications, Inc v. City of Lansingred1 sentence2010As Justice MARKMAN states, consistent with Justice YOUNG’s analysis: “By allowing this appeal to proceed, the Court can only ‘reach moot questions or declare principles or rules of law that have no practical legal effect in the case before [it],’” citing Federated Publications, Inc v Lansing, 467 Mich 98, 112 (2002). | 1 | 1 |
Robinson v. City of Detroitgreen2 sentences2009See Robinson v Detroit, 462 Mich 439, 466 ; 613 NW2d 307 (2000) (observing that before reversing a precedent, “the Court must ask [inter alia] whether the previous decision has become so embedded, so accepted, so fundamental, to everyone’s expectations that to change it would produce ... practical real-world dislocations”). 2009See Robinson v Detroit, 462 Mich 439, 466 ; 613 NW2d 307 (2000) (observing that before reversing a precedent, “the Court must ask [inter alia] whether the previous decision has become so embedded, so accepted, so fundamental, to everyone’s expectations that to change it would produce ... practical real-world dislocations”). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Michigan. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Able Demolition, Inc v. City of Pontiac
green
2 sentences2021Martin v East Lansing School Distr, 193 Mich App 166, 177 ; 483 NW2d 656 (1992) is cited for the proposition that “[a] claim of unjust enrichment does not apply if there is an express contract.” Able Demolition, 275 Mich App 577 , 586 n 4; 739 NW2d 696 (2007). 2021Martin v East Lansing School Distr, 193 Mich App 166, 177 ; 483 NW2d 656 (1992) is cited for the proposition that “[a] claim of unjust enrichment does not apply if there is an express contract.” Able Demolition, 275 Mich App 577 , 586 n 4; 739 NW2d 696 (2007). | 1 | 2021–2021 |
Martin v. East Lansing School District
green
2 sentences2021Martin v East Lansing School Distr, 193 Mich App 166, 177 ; 483 NW2d 656 (1992) is cited for the proposition that “[a] claim of unjust enrichment does not apply if there is an express contract.” Able Demolition, 275 Mich App 577 , 586 n 4; 739 NW2d 696 (2007). 2021Martin v East Lansing School Distr, 193 Mich App 166, 177 ; 483 NW2d 656 (1992) is cited for the proposition that “[a] claim of unjust enrichment does not apply if there is an express contract.” Able Demolition, 275 Mich App 577 , 586 n 4; 739 NW2d 696 (2007). | 1 | 2021–2021 |
Admiral Insurance v. Columbia Casualty Insurance
green
2 sentences2021The trial court determined that Young’s claim against Peter must fail because the record contained “nothing to indicate that the VanderMeers engaged in criminal acts by dealing with customers of GCI.” It is well settled that “[a] civil conspiracy is a combination of two or more persons, by some concerted action, to accomplish a criminal or unlawful purpose, or to accomplish a lawful purpose by criminal or unlawful means.” Admiral Ins Co v Columbia Cas Ins Co, 194 Mich App 300, 313 ; 486 NW2d 351 (1992). 2021The trial court determined that Young’s claim against Peter must fail because the record contained “nothing to indicate that the VanderMeers engaged in criminal acts by dealing with customers of GCI.” It is well settled that “[a] civil conspiracy is a combination of two or more persons, by some concerted action, to accomplish a criminal or unlawful purpose, or to accomplish a lawful purpose by criminal or unlawful means.” Admiral Ins Co v Columbia Cas Ins Co, 194 Mich App 300, 313 ; 486 NW2d 351 (1992). | 1 | 2021–2021 |
People v. Goecke
green
2 sentences2012People v Goecke, 457 Mich 442 , 448 n 2; 579 NW2d 868 (1998) (noting that this Court may take judicial notice of facts not subject to reasonable dispute); MRE 201. 2012People v Goecke, 457 Mich 442 , 448 n 2; 579 NW2d 868 (1998) (noting that this Court may take judicial notice of facts not subject to reasonable dispute); MRE 201. | 1 | 2012–2012 |
Esselman v. Garden City Hospital
green
1 sentence2010Thus, as the Court of Appeals in this case correctly opined, under Roberts, an NOI “does not need to contain any explicit statement of whether a corporate defendant is directly or vicariously liable; rather, it only needs to serve adequate notice to the defendants whether plaintiff intends to proceed against them on a vicarious liability theory.” Esselman, 284 Mich App at 218 . 3 Thus, there is no basis for Justice YOUNG’s claim that we failed to apply the requirements of § 2912b and Roberts, let alone that we have abandoned precedent. | 1 | 2010–2010 |
Palmer v. Palmer
green
2 sentences2009Not only is Justice Young's rule inconsistent with Palmer, 36 Mich. at 491 , and Colburn, 60 Mich. at 200 , 26 N.W. 878 , as discussed earlier, I do not believe that he has demonstrated why stare decisis should not be followed with regard to these decisions, which have adequately served this state for well over a century. 2009Not only is Justice Young’s rule inconsistent with Palmer, 36 Mich at 491 , and Colburn, 60 Mich at 200 , as discussed earlier, I do not believe that he has demonstrated why stare decisis should not be followed with regard to these decisions, which have adequately served this state for well over a centuiy. | 1 | 2009–2009 |
Colburn v. First Baptist Church
green
2 sentences2009Not only is Justice Young's rule inconsistent with Palmer, 36 Mich. at 491 , and Colburn, 60 Mich. at 200 , 26 N.W. 878 , as discussed earlier, I do not believe that he has demonstrated why stare decisis should not be followed with regard to these decisions, which have adequately served this state for well over a century. 2009Not only is Justice Young’s rule inconsistent with Palmer, 36 Mich at 491 , and Colburn, 60 Mich at 200 , as discussed earlier, I do not believe that he has demonstrated why stare decisis should not be followed with regard to these decisions, which have adequately served this state for well over a centuiy. | 1 | 2009–2009 |
State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Enterprise Leasing Co.
green
1 sentence2000This is not a case in which the owner of a vehicle has attempted to contractually shift its responsibility for providing primary residual liability coverage on the vehicle to the driver and the driver’s insurer; contractual provisions of this nature were held to be invalid in State Farm, supra. Rather, the *235 contractual provision at issue in the instant case simply afforded the dealership the right of indemnification from Young. | 1 | 2000–2000 |
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.