Cases
Search U.S. court opinions (CourtListener / Free Law Project), or resolve a reporter citation to its case via the Caselaw Access Project. Facts only — name, court, date, status, citation count. Never a holding-summary.
20 opinions for “Brown v. Beneficial Michigan, Inc”
Lisa Kemerer v. State of Michiganpublic domain
If this opinion indicates that it is “FOR PUBLICATION,” it is subject to revision until final publication in the Michigan Appeals Reports. STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS LISA KEMERER, and all others similarly situated, FOR PUBLICATION October 29, 2024 Plaintiff-Appellee/Cross-Appellant,
Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan Syllabus Chief Justice: Justices: Megan K. Cavanagh Brian K. Zahra
State v. Courtney C. Brownpublic domain
2020 WI 63 SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN CASE NO.: 2017AP774-CR COMPLETE TITLE: State of Wisconsin, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Courtney C. Brown, Defendant-Appellant-Petitioner. REVIEW OF DECISION OF THE COURT OF APPEALS
People of Michigan v. William Littlepublic domain
Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan Chief Justice: Justices: Syllabus Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman
State v. Courtney C. Brownpublic domain
2020 WI 63 SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN CASE NO.: 2017AP774-CR COMPLETE TITLE: State of Wisconsin, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Courtney C. Brown, Defendant-Appellant-Petitioner. REVIEW OF DECISION OF THE COURT OF APPEALS
People of Michigan v. Nevin Hughespublic domain
Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan Chief Justice: Justices: Syllabus Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman
434 B.R. 807 (2010) In re LUCRE, INC., Debtor. Thomas C. Richardson, Trustee, Plaintiff, v. Michigan Bell Telephone Company d/b/a AT & T Michigan (f/k/a SBC Michigan), Defendant. Bankruptcy No. HG 05-21732. Adversary No. 09-80136. United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Michigan. July 20, 2010. *809 Michael S. McElwee, Esq.,
716 N.W.2d 278 (2006) 270 Mich. App. 401 MOSES, INC; Transportation Riders United, Inc; City of Ferndale, Lawrence Birchfield, Phyllis Williamson, Anthony Fillipis, Marcia Yakes, and Richard Bernstein, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. SOUTHEAST MICHIGAN COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS, a/k/a/ SEMCOG, Defendant-Appellee. Docket No. 258749. Court of Appeals of Michigan. S
The Gym 24/7 Fitness LLC v. State of Michiganpublic domain
If this opinion indicates that it is “FOR PUBLICATION,” it is subject to revision until final publication in the Michigan Appeals Reports. STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS THE GYM 24/7 FITNESS, LLC, and All Others FOR PUBLICATION Similarly Situated, March 31, 2022
Ysasi v. Brownpublic domain
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER JAMES O. BROWNING, District Judge. THIS MATTER comes before the Court on: (i) the Defendants’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment, filed December 16, 2013 (Doc. 43)(“MSJ”); and (ii) the Defendants’ Objections to Plaintiffs Proposed Jury Instructions, filed February 14, 2014 (Doc. 68)(“Objections”). The Court held a hearing on February 13, 2014. The primary issues
Brown v. Platapublic domain
Justice Kennedy delivered the opinion of the Court. This case arises from serious constitutional violations in California’s prison system. The violations have persisted for years. They remain uncorrected. The appeal comes to this Court from a three-judge District Court order directing California to remedy two ongoing violations of the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause, a guarantee binding on the States by the D
Brown v. Platapublic domain
(Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2010 1 Syllabus NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit
Brown v. Platapublic domain
(Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2010 1 Syllabus NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit
Beneficial National Bank USA v. Best Receptions Systems, Inc. (In Re Best Reception Systems, Inc.)public domain
220 B.R. 932 (1998) In re BEST RECEPTION SYSTEMS, INC., Debtor. BENEFICIAL NATIONAL BANK USA, Plaintiff, v. BEST RECEPTIONS SYSTEMS, INC., Defendants (5 Cases). Geneva JOHNSON, Joel Stephenson, Plaintiffs, v. RICKLES ELECTRONICS & SATELLITES, et al., Defendants. Donald HICKS, et al., Plaintiffs, v. SKY-LINK CABLE, INC., et al., Defendants. Sykes POTTER, Plaintiff, v. STAR VISION, INC., Defendant. Ma
State of Iowa v. Scottize Danyelle Brownpublic domain
APPEL, Justice (dissenting). Under article I, section 8 of the Iowa Constitution, can a police officer use a common minor traffic violation as an after-the-fact pretext to seize a vehicle and its passengers when the actual reason for the stop was constitutionally inadequate? Today's majority says yes. I say NO! I. Summary. History demonstrates that one of the fundamental purpos
State of Iowa v. Scottize Danyelle Brownpublic domain
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF IOWA No. 17–0367 Filed June 28, 2019 STATE OF IOWA, Appellee, vs. SCOTTIZE DANYELLE BROWN, Appellant. Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Nathan A. Callahan, District Associate Judge. The defendant challenges her conviction for operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated under Iowa Code section 321J.2 (2017), arguing she was subjected to an
Michigan Gambling Opposition v. Kempthornepublic domain
BROWN, Circuit Judge, dissenting in part: I join Parts I and II of the court’s opinion, but I cannot agree § 5 of the IRA is constitutional. Consequently, I dissent from Part III. *34I Like other courts that have rejected nondelegation challenges to § 5, Carcieri v. Kempthome, 497 F.3d 15, 41-43 (1st Cir.2007) (e
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT VICTORIA A. ROBERTS, District Judge. I. INTRODUCTION Before the Court is a challenge to the “Michigan Fair and Open Competition in Governmental Construction Act,” 2011 Mich. Pub. Acts 98, M.C.L. § 408.871, et seq. (the “Act”). On October 21, 2011, Michigan Gover
Turner v. 1212 S. Michigan Partnershippublic domain
823 N.E.2d 1062 (2005) 355 Ill. App.3d 885 291 Ill.Dec. 476 Lernon TURNER and Adrianne Jones-Turner, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. 1212 S. MICHIGAN PARTNERSHIP, LaSalle National Trust, N.A. as Trustee of Land Trust # 4220 f/k/a American National Bank & Trust Company, AIMCO Residential Group, L.P. a/k/a AIMCO and INSIGNIA Management Group, Defendants-Appellees. No. 1-02-2279.
BOGGS, Circuit Judge. The plaintiffs filed several civil rights claims against the defendants, alleging that the defendants had denied and/or interfered with the plaintiffs’ right to equal access to housing. The plaintiffs claim that their right *340to housing was violated when a house owner, who was negotiating with a state agency to rent the house as a group home fo