Pellegrino v. AMPCO SYSTEMS PARKING

Michigan Supreme Court

Pellegrino v. AMPCO SYSTEMS PARKING

764 N.W.2d 569, 483 Mich. 999

Michigan Supreme Court·Decided May 7, 2009·No. 137111·Published

Opinion

The motion for immediate consideration of the motion to strike is granted. The motion to strike is granted in part. The paragraph spanning pages 1 and 2 of the plaintiffs’ response to the defendant’s application for leave to appeal is stricken because it contains information that is not part of the record on appeal. MCR 7.210(A)(1). The motion for extension of time to file a reply and the motion to note recent Supreme Court decision are granted. The application for leave to appeal the May 27, 2008, judgment of the Court of Appeals is granted, limited to the issue whether the defendant is entitled to a new trial based on a violation of MCR 2.511(F)(2). Court of Appeals No. 274743.

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

The motion for immediate consideration of the motion to strike is granted. The motion to strike is granted in part. The paragraph spanning pages 1 and 2 of the plaintiffs’ response to the defendant’s application for leave to appeal is stricken because it contains information that is not part of the record on appeal. MCR 7.210(A)(1). The motion for extension of time to file a reply and the motion to note recent Supreme Court decision are granted. The application for leave to appeal the May 27, 2008, judgment of the Court of Appeals is granted, limited to the issue whether the defendant is entitled to a new trial based on a violation of MCR 2.511(F)(2). Court of Appeals No. 274743.

Pellegrino v. AMPCO SYSTEMS PARKING, 764 N.W.2d 569, 483 Mich. 999 (Mich. 2009).

Pincite

764 N.W.2d 569 (Pellegrino v. AMPCO SYSTEMS PARKING) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.