City of Detroit v. 17526 RIOPELLE

741 N.W.2d 302, 480 Mich. 960

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in City of Detroit v. 17526 RIOPELLE. Read the opinion of the Court — 479 Mich. 860 →

Michigan Supreme Court·Decided November 29, 2007·No. 133316·Published

Opinion

741 N.W.2d 302 (2007)

CITY OF DETROIT, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
17526 RIOPELLE, Occupant, Andrea Campbell, Acorn Investment, Defendant-Appellant.

Docket No. 133316. COA No. 269377.

Supreme Court of Michigan.

November 29, 2007.

*303 On order of the Court, the motion for reconsideration of this Court's July 30, 2007 order is considered, and it is DENIED, because it does not appear that the order was entered erroneously.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

741 N.W.2d 302 (2007)

CITY OF DETROIT, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
17526 RIOPELLE, Occupant, Andrea Campbell, Acorn Investment, Defendant-Appellant.

Docket No. 133316. COA No. 269377.

Supreme Court of Michigan.

November 29, 2007.

*303 On order of the Court, the motion for reconsideration of this Court's July 30, 2007 order is considered, and it is DENIED, because it does not appear that the order was entered erroneously.

City of Detroit v. 17526 RIOPELLE, 741 N.W.2d 302, 480 Mich. 960 (Mich. 2007).

Pincite

741 N.W.2d 302 (City of Detroit v. 17526 RIOPELLE) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

CITY OF DETROIT, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. 17526 RIOPELLE, Occupant, Andrea Campbell, Acorn Investment, Defendant-Appellant.

CITY OF DETROIT, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
17526 RIOPELLE, Occupant, Andrea Campbell, Acorn Investment, Defendant-Appellant.