Oram v. Oram
771 N.W.2d 743, 485 Mich. 866
This text of 771 N.W.2d 743 (Oram v. Oram) 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
Oram v. Oram, 771 N.W.2d 743, 485 Mich. 866 (Mich. 2009).
Opinion
Latif Z. ORAM a/k/a Randy Z. Oram and O.B. Properties Limited Partnership, Plaintiffs/Counter-Defendants-Appellees, and
O.B. Properties and Jam Sound Specialists, Inc., Plaintiffs/Counter-Defendants/Third-Party Plaintiffs-Appellees,
v.
John ORAM and Gary Oram, Defendants/Counter-Plaintiffs/Third-Party Plaintiffs-Appellees, and
International Outdoor, Inc., Vision Properties, Inc., Discount Paging Co., Inc., and Future Vision Properties, L.L.C., Third-Party Defendants, and
Harry Cendrowski, Intervening-Plaintiff-Appellee, and
Thav, Gross, Steinway & Bennett, P.C., and Armand Velardo, Intervening-Plaintiffs, and
Abbott Nicholson, P.C., Intervening-Plaintiff-Appellant.
Supreme Court of Michigan.
Order
On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the April 16, 2009 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.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
People v. Allen
771 N.W.2d 743 (Michigan Supreme Court, 2009)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
771 N.W.2d 743, 485 Mich. 866, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/oram-v-oram-mich-2009.