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.
6 Michigan opinions name it 2 courts 1978–2013 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 |
|---|---|---|
McCann v. Michigangreen2 sentences1980In Wright v Detroit, 402 *109 Mich 861; 261 NW2d 535 (1978), the Supreme Court reversed an accelerated judgment granted in favor of the City of Detroit on grounds that the complaint failed to state a cause of action: "The complaint states a claim for which relief may be granted because it pleads facts which, if proved, demonstrate that the activity complained of is not activity 'in the exercise or discharge of a governmental function’ under MCLA 691.1407; MSA 3.996(107), and, therefore, 'does not fall within the ambit of immunity established by the Legislature in 1970 PA 155 .’ McCann v State 1978In lieu of granting leave to appeal, the Supreme Court in an order peremptorily reversed the summary judgment, observing: "The complaint states a claim for which relief may be granted because it pleads facts which, if proved, demonstrate that the activity complained of is not activity 'in the exercise or discharge of a governmental function’ under MCLA 691.1407; MSA 3.996(107), and, therefore, 'does not fall within the ambit of immunity established by the Legislature in 1970 PA 155 .’ McCann v Michigan, 398 Mich 65, 77 [ 247 NW2d 521 ] (1976).” 399 Mich at 835. | 2 | 2 |
Popp v. Crittenton Hospitalgreen2 sentences1997See Popp v Crittenton Hosp, 181 Mich App 662 ; 449 NW2d 678 (1989). 1997See Popp v Crittenton Hosp, 181 Mich App 662 ; 449 NW2d 678 (1989). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Michigan. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
In Re Estate of Wojtalewicz
green
1 sentence2013See In re Wojtalewicz Estate, 93 Ill App 3d 1061, 1062-1063; 418 NE2d 418 (1981) (observing that the in terrorem clause in the testator’s will “forbade any proceeding to challenge any of the provisions of the will,” and that “[t]he provision of the will naming the executor obviously was within the ambit of this clause”); see also In re Kubick Estate, 9 Wash App 413, 419; 513 P2d 76 (1973) (observing that the in terrorem clause in the decedent’s will “specifically applie[d] to any person who shall ‘contest this will or object to any of the provisions hereof,’ ” and concluding that a beneficiary | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Potter v. Pacific National Bank
green
1 sentence2013See In re Wojtalewicz Estate, 93 Ill App 3d 1061, 1062-1063; 418 NE2d 418 (1981) (observing that the in terrorem clause in the testator’s will “forbade any proceeding to challenge any of the provisions of the will,” and that “[t]he provision of the will naming the executor obviously was within the ambit of this clause”); see also In re Kubick Estate, 9 Wash App 413, 419; 513 P2d 76 (1973) (observing that the in terrorem clause in the decedent’s will “specifically applie[d] to any person who shall ‘contest this will or object to any of the provisions hereof,’ ” and concluding that a beneficiary | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Kreski v. Modern Wholesale Electric Supply Co.
green
1 sentence1998We further emphasized that, rather than representing a bright-line rule, the firefighter’s rule would be subject to “fine tuning ... to best balance the underlying rationales with the interest of allowing recovery when those rationales are not implicated.” Id. at 371 . 3 More recently, in Gibbons v Caraway, 455 Mich 314 ; 565 NW2d 663 (1997), we confirmed the public policy rationale for the firefighter’s rule, but circumscribed the scope of the rule, noting that all risks encountered by safety officers do not fall within the ambit of the rule. 4 We also held that a plaintiff’s receipt of worke | 1 | 1998–1998 |
Gibbons v. Caraway
green
2 sentences1998We further emphasized that, rather than representing a bright-line rule, the firefighter’s rule would be subject to “fine tuning ... to best balance the underlying rationales with the interest of allowing recovery when those rationales are not implicated.” Id. at 371 . 3 More recently, in Gibbons v Caraway, 455 Mich 314 ; 565 NW2d 663 (1997), we confirmed the public policy rationale for the firefighter’s rule, but circumscribed the scope of the rule, noting that all risks encountered by safety officers do not fall within the ambit of the rule. 4 We also held that a plaintiff’s receipt of worke 1998We further emphasized that, rather than representing a bright-line rule, the firefighter’s rule would be subject to “fine tuning ... to best balance the underlying rationales with the interest of allowing recovery when those rationales are not implicated.” Id. at 371 . 3 More recently, in Gibbons v Caraway, 455 Mich 314 ; 565 NW2d 663 (1997), we confirmed the public policy rationale for the firefighter’s rule, but circumscribed the scope of the rule, noting that all risks encountered by safety officers do not fall within the ambit of the rule. 4 We also held that a plaintiff’s receipt of worke | 1 | 1998–1998 |
Roberts v. Vaughn
green
2 sentences1998The relationship of the public with a salaried fire fighter is no different than with a volunteer. [ 214 Mich App 625, 630 ; 543 NW2d 79 (1995).] We cannot agree with the Court of Appeals determination that no valid distinction exists in the application of the rule between professional and volunteer firefighters. 1998The relationship of the public with a salaried fire fighter is no different than with a volunteer. [ 214 Mich App 625, 630 ; 543 NW2d 79 (1995).] We cannot agree with the Court of Appeals determination that no valid distinction exists in the application of the rule between professional and volunteer firefighters. | 1 | 1998–1998 |
People v. John Alexander
green
2 sentences1980In People v John Alexander, 82 Mich App 486 ; 266 NW2d 489 (1978), the Court found that the exception to the concealed weapons statute was inapplicable to an inmate who was arrested at Jackson State Prison. 1980In People v John Alexander, 82 Mich App 486 ; 266 NW2d 489 (1978), the Court found that the exception to the concealed weapons statute was inapplicable to an inmate who was arrested at Jackson State Prison. | 1 | 1980–1980 |
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.