Skip to main content
A Better Partnership

May 2011

May 2011
23
May 23, 2011

COA Opinion: Federal tax benefit rule applies under Michigan law

In Sturrus v. Department of Treasury, No. 295403, the Michigan Court of Appeals held that Michigan's Income Tax Act (ITA) incorporates the federal tax benefit rule, 26 U.S.C. 111(a), but the rule did not apply to the plaintiff's tax return. After collecting interest on loans made to Pulper Distributing Company ('Pulper'), the pla

May 2011
20
May 20, 2011

COA Opinion: Physical custody change requires more than a child "growing up" and new boarders in the home

In Gerstenschlager v. Gerstenschlager, No. 300858, the Michigan Court of Appeals reversed the trial court's modification of a primary physical custody arrangement regarding the parties' son. When the parties divorced in 2007, the plaintiff, who lived in Michigan, was awarded custody of their two daughters, and the defendant, who

May 2011
19
May 19, 2011

COA Opinion: Criminal acts exclusion bars insurance coverage for suit seeking damages arising from juvenile's assault of another player during a basketball game

On May 17, 2011, the Court of Appeals published its per curiam opinion in Auto Club Insurance Ass'n v Andrzejewski, No. 297551. This case arises from a dispute between 13 year old boys during a basketball game. Eventually one of the boys, Nicolas Andrzejewski, admitted that he put the other boy in a headlock and other witnesses stated that he then

May 2011
19
May 19, 2011

COA Opinion: A nurse's statements to an investigator when she was aiding in an interview of the wounded witness did not amount to a second layer of hearsay because she was merely acting as a conduit o

In People v. Jackson, No. 285532, the Court of Appeals affirmed Defendant's conviction for first-degree premeditated murder, conspiracy to commit murder, assault with intent to commit murder, and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony. The Court rejected Defendant's claims of insufficient evidence, discovery violations, juror misconduct, improper

May 2011
18
May 18, 2011

COA Opinion: WPA is the exclusive remedy for an employee terminated in retaliation for participating in an investigation or inquiry, which includes an administrative search

In Anzaldua v. Neogen Corp, No. 296978, the court held that the Whistleblowers' Protection Act ('WPA') provides the exclusive remedy for an employee terminated due to her participation in an administrative inspection of a boiler. Consequently, the 90-day limitations period in the WPA applied to bar the employee's claim, despite her attempt to frame her claim as ari

Displaying results 13-18 (of 32)
 |<  <  1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6  >  >| 

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