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 1986–1997 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 |
|---|---|---|
In Re Cook Estategreen2 sentences1997In re Cook Estate, supra at 608-609, 400 N.W.2d 695 ; Admiral Merchants Motor Freight, Inc. v. Dep't of Labor, 149 Mich.App. 344, 350 , 386 N.W.2d 193 (1986). 1997In re Cook Estate, supra at 608-609; Admiral Merchants Motor Freight, Inc v Dep’t of Labor, 149 Mich App 344, 350 ; 386 NW2d 193 (1986). | 1 | 2 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Michigan. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Admiral Merchants Motor Freight, Inc v. Department of Labor
neutral
2 sentences1997In re Cook Estate, supra at 608-609; Admiral Merchants Motor Freight, Inc v Dep’t of Labor, 149 Mich App 344, 350 ; 386 NW2d 193 (1986). 1997In re Cook Estate, supra at 608-609; Admiral Merchants Motor Freight, Inc v Dep’t of Labor, 149 Mich App 344, 350 ; 386 NW2d 193 (1986). | 5 | 1986–1997 |
Loesch v. First National Bank
green
2 sentences1986In Loesch v First National Bank of Ann Arbor, 249 Mich 326, 330 ; 228 NW 717 (1930), the Court said: The final decree of a court of competent jurisdiction made and entered in a proceeding of which all parties in interest have due and legal notice and from which no appeal is taken cannot be set aside and held for naught by the decree of another court in a collateral proceeding commenced years subsequent to the date of such final decree._ The doctrine of res judicata bars a litigant from relitigating a claim when (1) the former action was decided on the merits; (2) the matter contested in the se 1986In Loesch v First National Bank of Ann Arbor, 249 Mich 326, 330 ; 228 NW 717 (1930), the Court said: The final decree of a court of competent jurisdiction made and entered in a proceeding of which all parties in interest have due and legal notice and from which no appeal is taken cannot be set aside and held for naught by the decree of another court in a collateral proceeding commenced years subsequent to the date of such final decree._ The doctrine of res judicata bars a litigant from relitigating a claim when (1) the former action was decided on the merits; (2) the matter contested in the se | 2 | 1986–1986 |
Lud v. Howard
green
2 sentences1988Lud v Howard', 161 Mich App 603, 612 ; 411 NW2d 792 (1987). 1988Lud v Howard', 161 Mich App 603, 612 ; 411 NW2d 792 (1987). | 1 | 1988–1988 |