Revised Statutes of 1846
R.S. of 1846
10.2 Governor, governor-elect; order of succession, salary.
Sec. 2.
In case of the conviction of the governor on impeachment, his removal from office, his resignation or his death, the lieutenant governor, the elected secretary of state, the elected attorney general, the president pro tempore of the senate and the speaker of the house of representatives shall in that order be governor for the remainder of the governor's term. In case of the death of the governor-elect, the lieutenant governor-elect, the secretary of state-elect, the attorney general-elect, shall become governor in that order at the commencement of the governor-elect's term. If the governor or the person in line of succession to serve as governor is absent from the state, or suffering under an inability, the powers and duties of the office of governor shall devolve in such order of precedence until the absence or inability giving rise to the devolution of powers and duties ceases. The salary of any state officer while acting as governor due to the inability of his predecessor to discharge his powers and duties as governor shall be increased by an amount so that his total state salary is equal to that of governor.
History: R.S. 1846, Ch. 12 ;-- CL 1857, 141 ;-- CL 1871, 204 ;-- How. 260 ;-- CL 1897, 63 ;-- CL 1915, 85 ;-- CL 1929, 122 ;-- CL 1948, 10.2 ;-- Am. 1963, 2nd Ex. Sess., Act 20, Imd. Eff. Jan. 1, 1964
Notes of Decisions
Daimlerchrysler Motors Co. v. Bill Davis Racing, Inc., 408 F. Supp. 2d 337 (E.D. Mich. 2005).
· cites it 82× “BDR’s motion for summary judgment will be GRANTED, IN PART, to the extent D/C’s breach of contract claim is premised upon a breach of Section 10.2 of the parties’ February 14, 2000 Motorsport Racing Agreement (“MR Agreement”).”
Michigan Bell Tel. Co. v. MCI Metro Access Transmission Servs., Inc., 128 F. Supp. 2d 1043 (E.D. Mich. 2001).
· cites it 14× “MCI cites Section 10.2 of the interconnection agreement, which provides as follows: Each Party shall make available to the other Party its Telecommunication Services for resale at retail rates (‘Retail Resale Services’) in accordance with Section 251(b)(1) of the Act and…”
People v. Barbara, 255 N.W.2d 171 (Mich. 1977).
· cites it 2× “See also, Hearing Before the Subcommittee of the House Committee on Government Operations on Use of Polygraphs as "Lie Detectors" by the Federal Government, 88th Cong, 2d Sess (1964), cited in Note, The Emergence of the Polygraph at Trial, 73 Colum L Rev 1120, fn 3 (1973);…”
Kattar v. Three Rivers Area Hosp. Auth., 52 F. Supp. 2d 789 (W.D. Mich. 1999).
· cites it 2× “However, contrary to Kattar’s assertion, section 10.2 — 1(b) does not require a pretermination hearing or allow Kattar an opportunity to be heard before being removed.”
Lefkowitz v. Michigan Trucking, LLC (In Re Gainey Corp.), 447 B.R. 807 (Bankr. W.D. Mich. 2011).
· cites it 2× “” Trustee’s Response, ¶ 17; Sale Order, APA, § 10.2(b). Therefore, another issue faced by this court, within the meaning of the Sale Order and the Confirmation Order, is whether “administering” insurance claims includes the obligation to pay the insurance deductible amounts…”
Kukla v. Perry, 105 N.W.2d 176 (Mich. 1960).
“230 (Revised), § 10.2(y) (3), 1947-2 Cum Bull, p 293, revised by Rev Proc 59-3, 1959-1 Cum Bull, p 801, § 4.”
Trs. of B.A.C. Local 32 Insurnace Fund v. Caloia, 261 F. Supp. 2d 814 (E.D. Mich. 2003).
· cites it 2× “In order to protect and preserve all work heretofore performed by the Employees covered by this Agreement, and to protect against loss of such work by device or subterfuge, it is agreed as follows: Wherever the Employer performs work covered by this Agreement at any job site,…”
Attorney Gen. v. Guy, 55 N.W.2d 210 (Mich. 1952).
“An initiatory petition setting forth the newly proposed amendments to sections 10.2, 10.10 and. 10.17 of chapter 10 of the charter, as amended in 1945, was circulated in July, 1951, and after securing the opinion of the attorney general of the State of Michigan that the…”
City of Berkley v. Holmes, 191 N.W.2d 561 (Mich. Ct. App. 1971).
“1, shall control the court’s budget, as any other municipal officer would control his budget, pursuant to policies outlined in the City of Berkley Charter, ch 10, § 10.2 et seq. Appropriations can be challenged by applying the practical necessity test, Wayne Circuit Judges v.”
Roberts v. Richland Mfg. Co., 260 F. Supp. 274 (W.D. Mich. 1966).
· cites it 2× “1 Harper & James, Law of Torts, § 10.2 at 724-5; 3 Frumer & Friedman, Products Liability, § 44.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 10.2(b) — 1 case
Lefkowitz v. Michigan Trucking, LLC (In Re Gainey Corp.), 447 B.R. 807 (Bankr. W.D. Mich. 2011).
“” Trustee’s Response, ¶ 17; Sale Order, APA, § 10.2(b). Therefore, another issue faced by this court, within the meaning of the Sale Order and the Confirmation Order, is whether “administering” insurance claims includes the obligation to pay the insurance deductible amounts…”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 10.2(d) — 1 case
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 10.2(y) — 1 case
Kukla v. Perry, 105 N.W.2d 176 (Mich. 1960).
“230 (Revised), § 10.2(y) (3), 1947-2 Cum Bull, p 293, revised by Rev Proc 59-3, 1959-1 Cum Bull, p 801, § 4.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.