Skip to main content
A Better Partnership

August 2010

Aug 2010
August 27, 2010

COA Opinion: Expert testimony based on laboratory analysis by non-testifying analysts violated the Confrontation Clause

On August 24, 2010, the Court of Appeals published Judge's Saad's opinion in People v. Dendel, No. 247391. The defendant in this case had been convicted of second-degree murder for causing the death of her domestic partner by injecting him with a fatal dose of insulin. This case had been remanded by the Michigan Supreme Court for examination of

Aug 2010
August 27, 2010

COA Opinion: The Medical Marihuana Act does not apply retroactively.

In People v. Campbell, No. 29135 (published Aug. 26, 2010), the Court of Appeals held that the Medical Marihuana Act, MCL ' 333.26421 et seq., does not apply retroactively. The case began when Keit

Aug 2010
August 25, 2010

COA Opinion: Workers' Compensation Appellate Commission decision where one of the two-member majority only concurred in the result of the appeal did not constitute a true majority for the purposes of

On August 24, 2010, the Court of Appeals published its per curiam opinion in Findley v. DaimlerChrysler Corp., No. 291402. The case arose from an appeal from the Workers' Compensation Appellate Commission ("WCAC") which had affirmed a magistrate's denial of benefits. In affirming that decision, one commissioner issued an opinion that analyzed and a

Displaying results 7-12 (of 23)
 |<  <  1 - 2 - 3 - 4  >  >| 

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.



+ -