Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

WILLIAMS v. FIEDLAR

PER CURIAM.

The issues upon which leave to appeal in this matter was heretofore granted having been thoroughly examined, briefs thereon considered, and oral arguments heard, it is the opinion of the Court that leave to appeal was improvidently granted.

The judgment of the Court of Appeals is affirmed. Costs to defendants.

Williams v. Fiedlar (1970), 22 Mich. App. 179.

T.M. KAVANAGH, C.J., and ADAMS, T.E. BRENNAN, T.G. KAVANAGH, SWAINSON, and WILLIAMS, JJ., concurred.

BLACK, J. (concurring).

When the appellant's application for leave to review came to determination September 22, 1970 ( 384 Mich. 753), I did not participate in the decision, it having been my precedently submitted view that the application should be held in abeyance pending decision of Taylor v. Walter, which last was decided October 6, 1970 ( 384 Mich. 114) and ordered reheard with result shown in 385 Mich. 599.

In view of the events listed above I concur in the Court's determination that leave to review here was improvidently granted. However, I do not wish to be understood as agreeing with the entire opinion of Division 2 ( 22 Mich. App. 179). See Great Lakes Realty Corporation v. Peters (1953), 336 Mich. 325, 328, 329.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

WILLIAMS v. FIEDLAR
(Nov 9, 1971)