Petersen v. RIVERVIEW POLICE DEPARTMENT
747 N.W.2d 302, 480 Mich. 1187
This text of 747 N.W.2d 302 (Petersen v. RIVERVIEW POLICE DEPARTMENT) 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
Petersen v. RIVERVIEW POLICE DEPARTMENT, 747 N.W.2d 302, 480 Mich. 1187 (Mich. 2008).
Opinion
George V. PETERSEN, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
RIVERVIEW POLICE DEPARTMENT, et al., Jeffery Klaft, David Rudicil, and Michael P. McCarthy, Defendants-Appellees.
Supreme Court of Michigan.
On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the September 26, 2007 order 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. The motions for peremptory reversal, to remand, and to strike are DENIED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
747 N.W.2d 302, 480 Mich. 1187, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/petersen-v-riverview-police-department-mich-2008.