Parrish v. Sherrill
This text of 733 N.W.2d 23 (Parrish v. Sherrill) 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
James PARRISH, Plaintiff-Appellee, and
Kathleen Baughman, Plaintiff,
v.
Steven SHERRILL, Defendant-Appellant, and
Leonard Sherrill, Defendant.
Supreme Court of Michigan.
On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the January 18, 2007 judgment 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.
MARKMAN, J., would grant leave to appeal to consider whether, where plaintiff rejected a $75,000 offer to settle and subsequently was determined to be 99% at fault and received only $3,000 in damages, the trial court abused its discretion by concluding that plaintiff had "improved his position" by the litigation, and was thus entitled to costs as the prevailing party "on the entire record" under MCR 2.625(B)(2).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
733 N.W.2d 23, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/parrish-v-sherrill-mich-2007.