RUMFIELD v. Henney
744 N.W.2d 132, 480 Mich. 1077
This text of 744 N.W.2d 132 (RUMFIELD v. Henney) 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
RUMFIELD v. Henney, 744 N.W.2d 132, 480 Mich. 1077 (Mich. 2008).
Opinion
Timothy RUMFIELD, Personal Representative of the Estate of Daniel Rumfield, Deceased, and Conservator/Co-Guardian of Jeffrey Rumfield, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Matthew HENNEY, Defendant/Cross-Defendant, and
Brian Henney, Defendant, and
Kelly Fuels, Inc., d/b/a Woodland Express Mart, Defendant-Appellee.
Supreme Court of Michigan.
On order of the Court, the motion for reconsideration of this Court's November 21, 2007 order is considered, and it is DENIED, because it does not appear that the order was entered erroneously.
MARILYN J. KELLY, J., would grant the motion for reconsideration.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
DiVERGILIO v. CHARTER TOWNSHIP OF WEST BLOOMFIELD
744 N.W.2d 132 (Michigan Supreme Court, 2008)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
744 N.W.2d 132, 480 Mich. 1077, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rumfield-v-henney-mich-2008.