Category: Volume 56 No. 1

Professional Responsibility

Posted onAuthorAdministrator

This Article will address the noteworthy developments in Michigan law of Professional Responsibility during the 2008-2009 Survey period.1 Although Michigan courts issued only two published opinions directly impacting professional responsibility during the Survey period, two Informal Ethics Opinions were adopted by the State Bar of Michigan. In addition, there was a significant opinion by the Michigan Attorney Discipline Board related to professional misconduct, and the Michigan Supreme Court adopted a change to the pro hac vice requirements under the Michigan Court Rules (MCR). Read More …

Torts

Posted onAuthorAdministrator

This Survey found that narrow interpretations of words and phrases are the vehicle our appellate courts use to engage in outcome determinative decisions. In many cases, the motivation is to remove a case from the docket instead of striving to allow a plaintiff her day in court with a jury. Analyses of cases involving premises liability, medical malpractice, and governmental immunity demonstrate anti-individual bias in favor of corporate, insurance, and government interests. Read More …

Civil Procedure

Posted onAuthorAdministrator

There was no proverbial “landmark” Civil Procedure case in the current Survey period; however, a number of the selected cases are notable in that they provide helpful clarification and guidance for practitioners with respect to a number of procedural issues and doctrines. For example, the Michigan Appellate Courts have clarified the applicability of the statutes and court rules pertaining to both case evaluation sanctions and the taxation of litigation costs. Michigan courts have also adopted a subjective standard in the areas of service of process and the statute of limitations in attorney malpractice actions. Moreover, the courts have narrowed the doctrines of judicial estoppel and the law of the case doctrine. Noteworthy developments in Civil Procedure from the current Survey period are presented alphabetically by subject matter. Read More …

Taxation

Posted onAuthorAdministrator

This Survey period (June 1, 2008 – May 31, 2009) produced somewhat anemic results. There were many unpublished opinions. There was also a perceived increase in the number of petitions for leave to appeal to the Michigan Supreme Court filed by the Department of Treasury, resulting in fewer final decisions. Lastly, while the first set of Michigan Business Tax returns have been filed, there is an inherent time lag until the first cases challenging provisions of the tax will be filed and acted upon. Subsequent Survey periods will, no doubt, make up for the slim pickings of this Survey period. Read More …

Government Law

Posted onAuthorAdministrator

Michigan courts published fewer opinions in the government law area during the 2008-2009 Survey period than prior years. The Michigan Supreme Court issued no landmark opinions that heralded significant or historic changes in governmental immunity or in the legal relationships among public corporations, but did issue some noteworthy zoning and land use opinions. Both the supreme court and the court of appeals are still exploring the boundaries of the exemptions from disclosure in the Michigan Freedom of Information Act, but the newest interpretations are modest changes. The few reported opinions in governmental immunity reflect the severe limitations that the Michigan Supreme Court has imposed on litigable claims over the past decade. Unlike prior election years and with no significant legislative changes to election law, the courts issued no major opinions concerning voting rights or procedures. Political activity in the City of Detroit generated a usual number of court rulings, but none of the reported cases created new legal rules applicable to Michigan municipalities in general. Read More …

Workers’ Disability Compensation

Posted onAuthorAdministrator

The Survey period between August 1, 2008, and July 31, 2009, is framed by the opinion of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit in the case of Brown v. Cassens Transport Co. and the Michigan Supreme Court in the case of Petersen v. Magna Corp. It includes three decisions by the Michigan Supreme Court — Romain v. Frankenmuth Mutual Insurance. Co., Zahn v. Kroger Co., and Stone v. R.W. Lapine, Inc. — four by the Michigan Court of Appeals — Loos v. J.B. Installed Sales, Inc., Romero v. Burt Moeke Hardwoods, Inc., Kenney v. Alticor, Inc., and Reece v. Event Staffing, Inc. — and two en banc decisions of the Michigan Workers‘ Compensation Appellate Commission — Slais v. Michigan Department of State Police and Trammel v. Consumers Energy Co. Read More …