Skip to main content

April 2013

Apr 2013
26
April 26, 2013

COA holds that the trial court may amend a sentence without a hearing to add that the sentence is consecutive to parole

In People v. Howell, the Court of Appeals held that the trial court's amendment of the defendant's sentences for crimes committed while on parole'to specify that the new sentences would run consecutively with his prior sentence'merely corrected an omission by the court and was therefore permissible under Michigan's court rules. The defendant was not entitled to not

Apr 2013
26
April 26, 2013

COA holds that increase in crime-victim-rights assessment did not violate ex post facto clause

In the consolidated cases of People v. Jones and People v. Anderson, the Court of Appeals held that imposition of an increased crime-victim-rights assessment (CVRA) on a convicted felon did not violate the constitutional ex post facto clauses, even when the standard assessment amount was increased occurred after the defendants committed the

Apr 2013
26
April 26, 2013

COA holds that divorce settlement is final despite mistake regarding value of real estate

In Kaftan v. Kaftan, the Court of Appeals considered the finality of a divorce settlement. At the time the parties agreed to the judgment of divorce and the settlement, certain real-estate investments owned by the couple were valued at $14,517,000. The settlement provided that the husband would retain all the real estate and would make payments to

Apr 2013
24
April 24, 2013

COA holds that an off-duty deputy was acting 'in the course of employment' for purpose of government immunity

In Niederhouse v. Palmerton, the Court of Appeals held that a deputy was acting "in the course of employment" while operating an airboat at an outdoor festival, despite the fact that he was off-duty at the time, because the deputy was acting in furtherance of the Sheriff's Department's purpose of providing rides to the public when he took his family for a ride in th

Apr 2013
24
April 24, 2013

COA holds that migrant worker was Michigan resident for purpose of No-Fault Act

In Tienda v Integon National Insurance Co, the Michigan Court of Appeals held that a migrant worker was a Michigan resident for the purpose of the No Fault Act because the migrant worker maintained no other residence when he lived in Michigan, and he took all his worldly possessions with him when he traveled from state to state. In this case, the mi

Displaying results 1-6 (of 28)
 |<  < 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5  >  >| 

NOTICE. Although we would like to hear from you, we cannot represent you until we know that doing so will not create a conflict of interest. Also, we cannot treat unsolicited information as confidential. Accordingly, please do not send us any information about any matter that may involve you until you receive a written statement from us that we represent you.

By clicking the ‘ACCEPT’ button, you agree that we may review any information you transmit to us. You recognize that our review of your information, even if you submitted it in a good faith effort to retain us, and even if you consider it confidential, does not preclude us from representing another client directly adverse to you, even in a matter where that information could and will be used against you.

Please click the ‘ACCEPT’ button if you understand and accept the foregoing statement and wish to proceed.

ACCEPTCANCEL

Text

+ -

Reset