Cases

Opinions of the United 2006 Decisions States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 8-28-2006 Scarborough v. Chase Manhattan Mtg Precedentia

RONAYNE KRAUSE, J. Plaintiff appeals by right the trial court’s dismissal of her claims on the ground that the trial court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction. We agree and affirm. Plaintiff is a teacher in the Novi Community School District and was a member of defendants, the Michigan Education Association (MEA) and the Novi Education Association, both of whic

WILDER, J. In this action to quiet title to a condominium unit, plaintiff, Trademark Properties of Michigan, LLC, appeals as of right an order granting summary disposition in favor of defendants, Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae), Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (MERS), and Bank of America (BOA). We reverse. I. FACTS AND PROCED

Opinion to: SJR TGT SN TJ EVK ERA GCH LCH JB Opinion issued December 20, 2007

Per Curiam. Plaintiffs appeal as of right from the trial court’s order denying plaintiffs’ motion for summary disposition and granting defendant’s1 motion for summary disposition. We reverse and remand for further proceedings. The facts of this case are not in dispute. On September 6, 2000, Sheryll D. Catton and Gregory J. Catton (the Cattons) purchased property in Wayne County with a

FIFTH DIVISION MCFADDEN, P. J., HODGES and PIPKIN, JJ. NOTICE: Motions for reconsideration must be physically received in our clerk’s office within ten days of the date of decision to be deemed timely filed. https://www.gaappeals.us/rules Septembe

Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan Syllabus Chief Justice: Justices: Elizabeth T. Clement Brian K. Zahra

REINHARDT, Circuit Judge: This case involves the worldwide television rights to a number of Laurel and Hardy silent films (“the silent subjects”). Appellee’s predecessor in interest, Hal Roach, Inc., and appellant Richard Feiner and Company, Inc. (“Feiner & Co.”) entered into a written agreement to license the television rights to certain of the films to Feiner & Co. f

REINHARDT, Circuit Judge: This case involves the worldwide television rights to a number of Laurel and Hardy silent films (“the silent subjects”). Appellee’s predecessor in interest, Hal Roach, Inc., and appellant Richard Feiner and Company, Inc. (“Feiner & Co.”) entered into a written agreement to license the television rights to certain of the films to Feiner & Co. f

OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO DISMISS GERALD E. ROSEN, Chief Judge. I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiff Weston K. Jackson (now deceased) commenced this suit, through his estate, in Wayne County Circuit Court on January 6, 2013, .asserting claims against Defendants Bank of America, N.A.; Set-erus, •• Inc.; and the Federal National Mortgage Association, arising from

O’CONNELL, J. This challenge to a mortgage foreclosure by advertisement is one of the spate of actions that have arisen in Michigan. Mortgagors, mortgagees, mortgage servicing agents, and the courts have contended with statutes, caselaw, and procedural rules attempting to lay bare the proper method of challenging foreclosure. Plaintiffs claims in this case present several issues the

[EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] *Page 548 [EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] *Page 549 {¶ 1} This is an appeal from a judgment of the Lucas County Court of Common Pleas, in which the trial co

KELLY, J. After nearly a decade of litigation and alternative dispute resolution proceedings, the indemnification contract underlying the troubled natatorium roof in this case again wends its way to this Court. We previously held that the six-year period of limitations of MCL 600.5807(8) applies to the parties’ indemnification contract.

McMillian, Judge. *219 Sure, Inc. ("Sure") appeals from the trial court's grant of summary judgment on its claims against Premier Petroleum, Inc. ("Premier") arising out of a petroleum supply contract and loan documents executed by the parties. For the reasons set forth below, we reverse the

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 GREAT LAKES PROPERTY MANAGEMENT FOR PUBLICATION CONSULTANTS, INC., August 10, 2023

Per Curiam. Respondent, the Michigan Department of Treasury (Treasury), appeals by right the July 27, 2010, final judgment of the Michigan Tax Tribunal cancelling Treasury’s assessments against Eastbrook Homes, Inc. (petitioner), for taxes, penalties, and interest due under the State Real Estate Transfer Tax Act (SRETTA), MCL 207.521 et seq., in the amount of $1,039,854.87 for the tax periods of 2003 through 2006. Petiti

O’BRIEN, J. In Docket No. 323257, plaintiff, Tennine Corporation, appeals as of right the trial court’s opinion and order granting summary disposition in favor of defendant Central Michigan Railway Company (CMR). 1 We reverse the trial court’s decision regarding CMR and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opini

800 F.Supp. 695 (1991) GL INDUSTRIES OF MICHIGAN, INC., d/b/a United Plastics Company, and George Levy, Plaintiffs, v. FORSTMANN-LITTLE,[1] F.L. Industries, F.L. Plastics Co., Inc., and ITT Corporation, Defendants. No. NA90-96-C. United States District Court, S.D. Indiana, New Albany Division. January 14, 1991. *696 Ja

795 F.Supp.2d 624 (2011) JP MORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A., Plaintiff, and Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Intervenor Plaintiff, v. FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant/Intervenor Defendant. Case No. 09-14891. United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division. June 10, 2011. *626 Brian M. Moore, Robe

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS ELIZABETH E. BROWN, Bankruptcy Judge. THIS MATTER comes before the Court on the Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Complaint, filed by Defendant Bank of America, N.A. (“Bank”). In their complaint, the Debtors claim that the Bank has continually violated the automatic stay by allowing the pre-petition foreclosure sale date to be continued automatically, from week to week, by the