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 1 courts 2000–2020 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 |
|---|---|---|
Nicholas v. Meridian Charter Township Boardgreen2 sentences2003Nicholas v Meridian Charter Twp Bd, 239 Mich App 525, 533-534 ; 609 NW2d 574 (2000). “[T]he purpose of the OMA is to promote governmental accountability by facilitating public access to official decision making and to provide a means through which the general public may better understand issues and decisions of public concern.” Kitchen v Ferndale City Council, 253 Mich App 115, 125 ; 654 NW2d 918 (2002), citing Booth Newspapers, Inc v Univ of Michigan Bd of Regents, 444 Mich 211 , *84 231; 507 NW2d 422 (1993). 2003Nicholas v Meridian Charter Twp Bd, 239 Mich App 525, 533-534 ; 609 NW2d 574 (2000). “[T]he purpose of the OMA is to promote governmental accountability by facilitating public access to official decision making and to provide a means through which the general public may better understand issues and decisions of public concern.” Kitchen v Ferndale City Council, 253 Mich App 115, 125 ; 654 NW2d 918 (2002), citing Booth Newspapers, Inc v Univ of Michigan Bd of Regents, 444 Mich 211 , *84 231; 507 NW2d 422 (1993). | 1 | 2 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Michigan. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Morrison v. City of East Lansing
green
2 sentences2016“We review for an abuse of discretion a trial court's decisions whether to invalidate a decision made in violation of the OMA and whether to grant or deny injunctive relief.” Morrison v East Lansing, 255 Mich App 505, 520 ; 660 NW2d 395 (2003), overruled in part on other grounds by Speicher, 497 Mich at 132 n 14, 143. 2016“We review for an abuse of discretion a trial court's decisions whether to invalidate a decision made in violation of the OMA and whether to grant or deny injunctive relief.” Morrison v East Lansing, 255 Mich App 505, 520 ; 660 NW2d 395 (2003), overruled in part on other grounds by Speicher, 497 Mich at 132 n 14, 143. | 3 | 2015–2020 |
Speicher v. Columbia Township Board of Trustees
green
2 sentences2016“We review for an abuse of discretion a trial court’s decisions whether to invalidate a decision made in violation of the OMA and whether to grant or deny injunctive relief.” Morrison v East Lansing, 255 Mich App 505, 520 ; 660 NW2d 395 (2003), overruled in part on other grounds by Speicher, 497 Mich at 132 n 14, 143. 2016“We review for an abuse of discretion a trial court's decisions whether to invalidate a decision made in violation of the OMA and whether to grant or deny injunctive relief.” Morrison v East Lansing, 255 Mich App 505, 520 ; 660 NW2d 395 (2003), overruled in part on other grounds by Speicher, 497 Mich at 132 n 14, 143. | 2 | 2016–2020 |
Whitman v. City of Burton
green
2 sentences2016In Whitman v City of Burton, 493 Mich 303, 311-312 ; 831 NW2d 223 (2013), the Michigan Supreme Court articulated the principles governing statutory construction: When interpreting a statute, we follow the established rules of statutory construction, the foremost of which is to discern and give effect to the intent of the Legislature. 2016In Whitman v City of Burton, 493 Mich 303, 311-312 ; 831 NW2d 223 (2013), the Michigan Supreme Court articulated the principles governing statutory construction: When interpreting a statute, we follow the established rules of statutory construction, the foremost of which is to discern and give effect to the intent of the Legislature. | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Menominee County Taxpayers Alliance, Inc v. Menominee County Clerk
green
2 sentences2015The trial court ruled that the Board’s noncompliance with the OMA had not “impaired the rights of the public.” Plaintiff asserts that this ruling was erroneous, relying on Menominee Co Taxpayers Alliance, Inc v Menominee Co Clerk, 139 Mich App 814 ; 362 NW2d 871 (1984). 2015The trial court ruled that the Board’s noncompliance with the OMA had not “impaired the rights of the public.” Plaintiff asserts that this ruling was erroneous, relying on Menominee Co Taxpayers Alliance, Inc v Menominee Co Clerk, 139 Mich App 814 ; 362 NW2d 871 (1984). | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Booth Newspapers, Inc v. University of Michigan Board of Regents
green
2 sentences2003Nicholas v Meridian Charter Twp Bd, 239 Mich App 525, 533-534 ; 609 NW2d 574 (2000). “[T]he purpose of the OMA is to promote governmental accountability by facilitating public access to official decision making and to provide a means through which the general public may better understand issues and decisions of public concern.” Kitchen v Ferndale City Council, 253 Mich App 115, 125 ; 654 NW2d 918 (2002), citing Booth Newspapers, Inc v Univ of Michigan Bd of Regents, 444 Mich 211 , *84 231; 507 NW2d 422 (1993). 2003Nicholas v Meridian Charter Twp Bd, 239 Mich App 525, 533-534 ; 609 NW2d 574 (2000). “[T]he purpose of the OMA is to promote governmental accountability by facilitating public access to official decision making and to provide a means through which the general public may better understand issues and decisions of public concern.” Kitchen v Ferndale City Council, 253 Mich App 115, 125 ; 654 NW2d 918 (2002), citing Booth Newspapers, Inc v Univ of Michigan Bd of Regents, 444 Mich 211 , *84 231; 507 NW2d 422 (1993). | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Kitchen v. Ferndale City Council
green
2 sentences2003Nicholas v Meridian Charter Twp Bd, 239 Mich App 525, 533-534 ; 609 NW2d 574 (2000). “[T]he purpose of the OMA is to promote governmental accountability by facilitating public access to official decision making and to provide a means through which the general public may better understand issues and decisions of public concern.” Kitchen v Ferndale City Council, 253 Mich App 115, 125 ; 654 NW2d 918 (2002), citing Booth Newspapers, Inc v Univ of Michigan Bd of Regents, 444 Mich 211 , *84 231; 507 NW2d 422 (1993). 2003Nicholas v Meridian Charter Twp Bd, 239 Mich App 525, 533-534 ; 609 NW2d 574 (2000). “[T]he purpose of the OMA is to promote governmental accountability by facilitating public access to official decision making and to provide a means through which the general public may better understand issues and decisions of public concern.” Kitchen v Ferndale City Council, 253 Mich App 115, 125 ; 654 NW2d 918 (2002), citing Booth Newspapers, Inc v Univ of Michigan Bd of Regents, 444 Mich 211 , *84 231; 507 NW2d 422 (1993). | 1 | 2003–2003 |
In Re JUDE
green
2 sentences2003MCL 15.270(2); In re Jude, 228 Mich App 667, 672 ; 578 NW2d 704 (1998). 2003MCL 15.270(2); In re Jude, 228 Mich App 667, 672 ; 578 NW2d 704 (1998). | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Esperance v. Chesterfield Township
green
1 sentence2000Esperance, supra at 464 . | 1 | 2000–2000 |
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.