Munster v. City of Battle Creek

759 N.W.2d 8

Michigan Supreme Court·Decided January 9, 2009·No. 137542·Published

Opinion

759 N.W.2d 8 (2009)

Ronald MUNSTER, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
CITY OF BATTLE CREEK, Defendant-Appellant, and
Second Injury Fund Vocationally Handicapped Provisions, Defendant-Appellee.

Docket No. 137542. COA No. 284666.

Supreme Court of Michigan.

January 9, 2009.

Order

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the September 19, 2008 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court.

HATHAWAY, J., not participating.

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

759 N.W.2d 8 (2009)

Ronald MUNSTER, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
CITY OF BATTLE CREEK, Defendant-Appellant, and
Second Injury Fund Vocationally Handicapped Provisions, Defendant-Appellee.

Docket No. 137542. COA No. 284666.

Supreme Court of Michigan.

January 9, 2009.

Order

HATHAWAY, J., not participating.

Munster v. City of Battle Creek, 759 N.W.2d 8 (Mich. 2009).

Pincite

759 N.W.2d 8 (Munster v. City of Battle Creek) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Ronald MUNSTER, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. CITY OF BATTLE CREEK, Defendant-Appellant, and Second Injury Fund Vocationally Handicapped Provisions, Defendant-Appellee.

Order

Ronald MUNSTER, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
CITY OF BATTLE CREEK, Defendant-Appellant, and
Second Injury Fund Vocationally Handicapped Provisions, Defendant-Appellee.