Bank One v. Condit
708 N.W.2d 401, 474 Mich. 1024
This text of 708 N.W.2d 401 (Bank One v. Condit) 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.
Bluebook
Bank One v. Condit, 708 N.W.2d 401, 474 Mich. 1024 (Mich. 2006).
Opinion
BANK ONE, NA, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Timothy B. CONDIT, Defendant-Appellant, and
Craig A. Kolmer and William K. Newcomb, Jr., Defendants.
Supreme Court of Michigan.
On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the May 16, 2005 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. The motions for immediate consideration and peremptory reversal are DENIED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
708 N.W.2d 401, 474 Mich. 1024, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bank-one-v-condit-mich-2006.