Court of Appeals to reconsider appeal of trial court's order denying motion to vacate plea

In People v. Reid, No. 148678, the Michigan Supreme Court remanded as on leave granted.  The Court of Appeals was directed to consider defendant’s appeal of the district court’s denial of his motion to rescind, revoke, or vacate his nolo contendere plea. The circuit court denied both motions. When the Court of Appeals originally considered defendant’s delayed application for leave to appeal, it only docketed the application as an appeal from the motion for production of documents, not from the motion to vacate his plea. The Michigan Supreme Court remanded the case to the Court of Appeals, so that it can consider the defendant’s application for leave to appeal as to the motion to vacate his nolo contendere plea.
Read More

COA denies relief from court’s deviation from standard jury instruction for a deadlocked jury

In People v. Galloway, No. 316262, the Michigan Court of Appeals denied relief to a criminal defendant where the judge told the foreperson to privately poll the jury as to who thought the jury was likely to reach a verdict soon. However, the court simultaneously warned courts not to deviate from the standard jury instructions for potentially deadlocked juries. Read More

MSC to clarify the $25k amount-in-controversy limit on district courts’ jurisdiction

Under MCL 600.8301, the district court has jurisdiction over civil controversies involving less than $25,000.  In Moody v. Home Owners Insurance Co., No. 149046, the Michigan Supreme Court granted leave to appeal whether a district court loses its subject matter jurisdiction if the amount in controversy ever exceeds the $25,000 limit.  The Supreme Court will clarify at what point in the proceedings the amount may exceed the $25,000 threshold, if ever. Read More

MSC to clarify when an acknowledgment of parentage should be revoked under Michigan’s Revocation of Paternity Act

The Michigan Supreme Court granted leave to appeal in Helton v. Beaman, No. 148927, clarify the standard for determining whether to revoke an acknowledgment of parentage under Michigan’s Revocation of Paternity Act, MCL 722.1437.  In its opinion, the Court of Appeals called for an appeal to the MSC.  In that same opinion, the COA held that the circuit court erred when it used the child’s best interest factors to deny plaintiff’s request to revoke defendant’s acknowledgment of parentage.  However, the COA affirmed the court’s decision on other grounds, reasoning that DNA evidence alone is not sufficient to require revocation, the legislature has not addressed the issue, and also that the plaintiff’s claims were barred by the doctrine of laches. Read More

COA: definite articles definitely matter when defining “plaintiff” under Michigan Court Rules

In Anne M. Hanton Trust v. Hantz Financial Services, Inc., No. 314889, the Michigan Court of Appeals held that a plaintiff is not barred from bringing a class action lawsuit by the time limits for class certification under MCR 3.501(B)(1) in a separate lawsuit in which the plaintiff was merely an unnamed putative class member.  Furthermore, because the class was not certified in the prior action, the 91-day clock for filing a motion for class certification never started running for Hanton. Read More
Displaying results 1-5 (of 500)
 |<  < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  >  >| 

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