cases citing standard (Michigan) · Go Syfert
← Michigan issues

cases citing standard in Michigan

6 Michigan opinions name it 1 courts 2015–2026 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.

Followed or applied (1)

CaseFollowedCited
Smith v. Globe Life Insurancegreen
mich · 1999 · cited in 6 Michigan opinions naming this issue, 2015–2026
2 sentences

2026Indeed, in Smith v Globe Life Ins Co, 460 Mich 446 , 455 n 2; 597 NW2d 28 (1999), the Supreme Court stated: We take this occasion to note that a number of recent decisions from this Court and the Court of Appeals have, in reviewing motions for summary disposition brought under MCR 2.116(C)(10), erroneously applied standards derived from Rizzo v Kretschmer, 389 Mich 363 ; 207 NW2d 316 (1973).

2026Indeed, in Smith v Globe Life Ins Co, 460 Mich 446 , 455 n 2; 597 NW2d 28 (1999), the Supreme Court stated: We take this occasion to note that a number of recent decisions from this Court and the Court of Appeals have, in reviewing motions for summary disposition brought under MCR 2.116(C)(10), erroneously applied standards derived from Rizzo v Kretschmer, 389 Mich 363 ; 207 NW2d 316 (1973).

36

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Michigan. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (1)

CaseCitedYears
Rizzo v. Kretschmer green
mich · 1973
2 sentences

2026Indeed, in Smith v Globe Life Ins Co, 460 Mich 446 , 455 n 2; 597 NW2d 28 (1999), the Supreme Court stated: We take this occasion to note that a number of recent decisions from this Court and the Court of Appeals have, in reviewing motions for summary disposition brought under MCR 2.116(C)(10), erroneously applied standards derived from Rizzo v Kretschmer, 389 Mich 363 ; 207 NW2d 316 (1973).

2026Indeed, in Smith v Globe Life Ins Co, 460 Mich 446 , 455 n 2; 597 NW2d 28 (1999), the Supreme Court stated: We take this occasion to note that a number of recent decisions from this Court and the Court of Appeals have, in reviewing motions for summary disposition brought under MCR 2.116(C)(10), erroneously applied standards derived from Rizzo v Kretschmer, 389 Mich 363 ; 207 NW2d 316 (1973).

32023–2026

Statutes the citing opinions construe

MI § Mich. Comp. Laws § 500.3135 (4)

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.

Where else courts name it

MI 6 (2015–2026) IL 3 (1989–2000)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check