pleading stating claim (Michigan) · Go Syfert
← Michigan issues

pleading stating claim in Michigan

6 Michigan opinions name it 1 courts 2018–2025 1 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 (0)

CaseFollowedCited
No positive-treatment citations attached to this issue in Michigan.

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 (5)

CaseCitedYears
Laudenslager v. Pendell Printing, Inc neutral
michctapp · 1996
2 sentences

2018Instead, plaintiff relies on Laudenslager v Penell Printing, Inc, 215 3 MCR 2.116(B)(2) states that “[a] motion under this rule may be filed at any time . . . but the hearing on a motion brought by a party asserting a claim shall not take place until at least 28 days after the opposing party was served with the pleading stating the claim.” -5- Mich App 167, 169; 544 NW2d 721 (1996), where this Court addressed whether the trial court erred when it entered an order of dismissal after the plaintiff mailed his brief four days before the deadline, but it was received one day late.

2018Instead, plaintiff relies on Laudenslager v Penell Printing, Inc, 215 3 MCR 2.116(B)(2) states that “[a] motion under this rule may be filed at any time . . . but the hearing on a motion brought by a party asserting a claim shall not take place until at least 28 days after the opposing party was served with the pleading stating the claim.” -5- Mich App 167, 169; 544 NW2d 721 (1996), where this Court addressed whether the trial court erred when it entered an order of dismissal after the plaintiff mailed his brief four days before the deadline, but it was received one day late.

22018–2018
Kemerko Clawson, LLC v. RXIV Inc. green
michctapp · 2006
1 sentence

2025MCR 2.401(B)(2)(a)(ii); Kemerko Clawson LLC, 269 Mich App at 349 . -3- (i) a written motion under this rule with supporting brief and any affidavits must be filed and served at least 21 days before the time set for the hearing, and (ii) any response to the motion (including brief and any affidavits) must be filed and served at least 7 days before the hearing. * * * (b) If the court sets a different time for filing and serving a motion, or a reply brief, its authorization must be endorsed in writing on the face of the notice of hearing or made by separate order.

12025–2025
Salem Industries, Inc. v. Mooney Process Equipment Co. green
michctapp · 1988
2 sentences

2020Salem Indus, Inc v Mooney Process Equip Co, 175 Mich App 213, 215-216 ; 437 NW2d 641 (1988).

2020Salem Indus, Inc v Mooney Process Equip Co, 175 Mich App 213, 215-216 ; 437 NW2d 641 (1988).

12020–2020
School District of Ferndale v. Royal Oak Township School District No. 8 green
mich · 1940
2 sentences

2019Intervention is defined in the civil law as “an action by which a third party becomes a party in a suit pending between others.” Ferndale Sch Dist v Royal Oak Twp, 293 Mich 1, 12 ; 291 NW 199 (1940) (citation and quotation omitted).

2019Intervention is defined in the civil law as “an action by which a third party becomes a party in a suit pending between others.” Ferndale Sch Dist v Royal Oak Twp, 293 Mich 1, 12 ; 291 NW 199 (1940) (citation and quotation omitted).

12019–2019
Yee v. Shiawassee County Board of Commissioners green
michctapp · 2002
2 sentences

2019MCR 2.116(B)(2) states that, “[a] motion under this rule may be filed at any time consistent with subrule (D) and subrule (G)(1), but the hearing on a motion brought by a party asserting a claim shall not take place until at least 28 days after the opposing party was served with the pleading stating the claim.” However, “MCR 2.116(B)(2) does not -5- apply to defendants who wish to move for summary disposition, but rather governs plaintiffs who wish to move for immediate summary disposition upon the filing of a complaint, hence the words ‘a party asserting a claim’ in MCR 2.116(B)(2).” Yee v Sh

2019MCR 2.116(B)(2) states that, “[a] motion under this rule may be filed at any time consistent with subrule (D) and subrule (G)(1), but the hearing on a motion brought by a party asserting a claim shall not take place until at least 28 days after the opposing party was served with the pleading stating the claim.” However, “MCR 2.116(B)(2) does not -5- apply to defendants who wish to move for summary disposition, but rather governs plaintiffs who wish to move for immediate summary disposition upon the filing of a complaint, hence the words ‘a party asserting a claim’ in MCR 2.116(B)(2).” Yee v Sh

12019–2019

Where else courts name it

KY 6 (1962–2021) MI 6 (2018–2025) SC 5 (2022–2026) WY 2 (1971–2026) TX 2 (2018–2020)

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