Robertson v. BLUE WATER OIL COMPANY
This text of 722 N.W.2d 659 (Robertson v. BLUE WATER OIL COMPANY) 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
Philip ROBERTSON and Sharon Robertson, Plaintiffs-Appellees,
v.
BLUE WATER OIL COMPANY, Defendant-Appellant.
Supreme Court of Michigan.
On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the November 8, 2005 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.
WEAVER, J., dissents and states as follows:
I dissent from the decision to deny leave to appeal. I would grant leave to appeal and ask the parties to brief whether Mann v. Shusteric Enterprises, Inc., 470 Mich. 320, 683 N.W.2d 573 (2004), was correctly decided.
MARKMAN, J., dissents and states as follows:
I would grant defendant's application for leave to appeal to address the issues of "avoidability" and "unavoidability" raised in my statement in Wiater v. Great Lakes Recovery Centers, Inc., ___ Mich. ___, 722 N.W.2d 664, 2006 WL 3041585 (Docket No. 128139).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
722 N.W.2d 659, 477 Mich. 897, 2006 Mich. LEXIS 2191, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/robertson-v-blue-water-oil-company-mich-2006.