Back in Motion Chiropractic Dc Pllc v. State Farm Mut Auto Ins Co
This text of Back in Motion Chiropractic Dc Pllc v. State Farm Mut Auto Ins Co (Back in Motion Chiropractic Dc Pllc v. State Farm Mut Auto Ins Co) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Michigan Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Order Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan
November 22, 2019 Bridget M. McCormack, Chief Justice
David F. Viviano, Chief Justice Pro Tem 160019 & (44) Stephen J. Markman Brian K. Zahra BACK IN MOTION CHIROPRACTIC, DC, Richard H. Bernstein PLLC, Elizabeth T. Clement Plaintiff-Appellee, Megan K. Cavanagh, Justices SC: 160019 v COA: 341886 Oakland CC: 17-002778-NF STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY Defendant-Appellant. _______________________________________/
On order of the Chief Justice, the stipulation signed by counsel for the parties agreeing to the dismissal of this application for leave to appeal is considered, and the application for leave to appeal is DISMISSED with prejudice and without costs. The motion to hold the case in abeyance is denied as moot.
I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. November 22, 2019
Clerk
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Back in Motion Chiropractic Dc Pllc v. State Farm Mut Auto Ins Co, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/back-in-motion-chiropractic-dc-pllc-v-state-farm-mut-auto-ins-co-mich-2019.