Neal v. Department of Corrections
755 N.W.2d 622, 482 Mich. 984
This text of 755 N.W.2d 622 (Neal v. Department of Corrections) 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
Neal v. Department of Corrections, 755 N.W.2d 622, 482 Mich. 984 (Mich. 2008).
Opinion
Tracy NEAL, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs-Appellees,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Kenneth McGinnis, Joan Yukins, Sally Langley, Carol Howes, Robert Salis, Cornell Howard, Martin Tate, Thomas Portman, William Ellison, Christopher Gallagher, Roderick Robey, William Overton, Clarice Stovall, Nancy Zang, John Andrews, Jan Baldwin, Wes Bonney, David Crukshank, Joseph Durigon, David Habitz, Edward Hook, Jack Hutchins, Dennis Iford, Derle Jones, Art Lancaster, Erin Richardson, Anthony Simmons, Fred Welch, Lynn Williams, Charles Williams, Defendants-Appellants.
Supreme Court of Michigan.
On order of the Court, the motion for immediate consideration is GRANTED. The application for leave to appeal the June 10, 2008 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the *623 question presented should be reviewed by this Court.
TAYLOR, C.J., not participating.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
In Re Ross
755 N.W.2d 622 (Michigan Supreme Court, 2008)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
755 N.W.2d 622, 482 Mich. 984, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/neal-v-department-of-corrections-mich-2008.