Skip to main content
A Better Partnership

May 2009

May 2009
27
May 27, 2009

COA Opinion: A ZBA Is Not Limited to the Record on Appeal

On May 26, 2009, the Court of Appeals published a unanimous, per curiam opinion in Hughes v. Township of Almena, No. 279085, addressing a number of procedural issues under the Township Zoning Act (“TZA”), which was repealed in 2006 by a statute that retained much of the same language, the Michigan Zoning Enabling Act. Most significantly

May 2009
25
May 25, 2009

Chief Justice Kelly in defense of MSC's satellite offices

On May 18, 2009, the Lansing State Journal published an editorial calling for the Michigan Supreme Court to close its satellite offices in Detroit and Traverse City to save taxpayer dollars. The Court voted to close its satellite offices in November 2008, and then reversed course in March 2009 after Justice Hathaway replaced Chief Justice Taylor. On May 24, 2009, the Lan

May 2009
24
May 24, 2009

MSC Order List: May 22, 2009

On Friday, May 22, 2009, the Michigan Supreme Court denied applications for leave to appeal in two cases, and vacated its previous order granting leave in People v. Fisher, Case No. 136591, a case in which the Court had already accepted merits briefing and held oral argument. Justice Weaver dissented from the order in <

May 2009
22
May 22, 2009

COA Opinion: Liparoto Constr., Inc. v. General Shale Brick, Inc.

The Court of Appeals, in Liparoto Construction, Inc. v. General Shale Brick, Inc., No. 282920, a published opinion, affirmed the grant of summary judgment in favor of a brick supplier (Lincoln Brick), a brick manufacturer (General Shale), and an insurer (State Auto). The claims of the plaintiff, a general contractor, arose after homeowners discovere

May 2009
22
May 22, 2009

COA Opinion: HMOs cannot impose minimum contribution requirements on employers as a condition to issuing a health benefit plan

In Priority Health v. Commissioner of the Office of Financial and Insurance Services, No. 278373, a published opinion, the Court of Appeals held yesterday that the Small Employer Group Health Coverage Act does not allow an HMO to impose minimum contribution requirements on employers as a condition to obtaining and maintaining a health benefit plan.

Displaying results 7-12 (of 50)
 |<  <  1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 - 8 - 9  >  >| 

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