Skip to main content
A Better Partnership

December 2012

Dec 2012
Dec 2012
December 13, 2012

MSC Opinion: People v. Mack

In lieu of granting leave to appeal in People v. Mack, the Michigan Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of the Court of Appeals in a 4-3 decision. In a memorandum opinion, the majority held that the legislatively created rule of evidence, MCL 768.27b, which addresses the admissibility of evidence in domestic-violence cases that a defendant has committed other a

Dec 2012
December 13, 2012

MSC Order List: December 12, 2012

Leave having been granted in Hall v. Stark Reagan, PC, Nos. 143909 and 143911, the Michigan Supreme Court reversed the part of the judgment of the Court of Appeals holding that the matter was not subject to arbitration, and reinstated the trial court's order granting summary disposition in favor of the defendants. The dispute in this case c

Dec 2012
December 12, 2012

COA Opinion: The relief granted to MDEQ against Worth Township for private septic system leaks was authorized by NREPA and not a Headlee violation

On remand, the Court of Appeals in Department of Environmental Quality v Township of Worth considered whether remedial measures, fines, and attorney fees imposed against Worth Township for allowing private septic systems to leak into Lake Huron were authorized under Michigan's Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act ('NREPA') or violated

Displaying results 19-24 (of 30)
 |<  <  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.



+ -