Tingley v. Wardrop
741 N.W.2d 22, 480 Mich. 944
This text of 741 N.W.2d 22 (Tingley v. Wardrop) 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
Tingley v. Wardrop, 741 N.W.2d 22, 480 Mich. 944 (Mich. 2007).
Opinion
William Q. TINGLEY, III, William Q. Tingley, and Daniel R. Bradley, Plaintiffs-Appellants, and
Proto-Cam, Inc., Bend Tooling, Inc., and Tennine Corporation, Plaintiffs,
v.
Robert F. WARDROP, II, William J. Fisher III, Todd R. Dickinson, Wardrop & Wardrop, P.C., Dickinson Wright, PLLC, Fisher & Dickinson, P.C., 900 Monroe LLC, 940 Monroe LLC, Pioneer Incorporated, City of Grand Rapids, John H. Logie, Dykema Excavators, Inc., and Fifth Third Bancorp, Defendants-Appellees.
Supreme Court of Michigan.
On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the February 22, 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.
*23 MICHAEL F. CAVANAGH, WEAVER, and MARILYN J. KELLY, JJ., would grant leave to appeal.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Allstate Insurance Company v. a & a MEDICAL TRANSPORTATION SERVICES, INC.
741 N.W.2d 22 (Michigan Supreme Court, 2007)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
741 N.W.2d 22, 480 Mich. 944, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tingley-v-wardrop-mich-2007.