FARM BUREAU INSURANCE v. City of Detroit
This text of 713 N.W.2d 782 (FARM BUREAU INSURANCE v. City of Detroit) 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
FARM BUREAU INSURANCE, as subrogee of Ron Dorsey, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
CITY OF DETROIT, Defendant-Appellee.
Supreme Court of Michigan.
On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the August 25, 2005 judgment 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.
MARKMAN, J., concurs and states as follows:
For the reasons articulated in my concurring statement in Reid v. Detroit (Docket No. 129884), lv. den. 474 Mich. 1116, 712 N.W.2d 163 (2006), I concur in the decision to deny leave to appeal, but I again urge the Legislature to consider whether further legal remedies are warranted for property owners in these circumstances.
MARILYN J. KELLY, J., would grant leave to appeal.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
713 N.W.2d 782, 475 Mich. 874, 2006 Mich. LEXIS 1146, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/farm-bureau-insurance-v-city-of-detroit-mich-2006.