Search for: "Hile v. State of Michigan"
Results 21 - 28
of 28
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
30 Mar 2012, 5:05 am
In Sweebe, the Michigan Supreme Court not only anticipated the holding of Kennedy, but answered the question left open in Kennedy: [W]hile a plan administrator must pay benefits to the named beneficiary as required by ERISA, this does not mean that the named beneficiary cannot waive her interest in retaining these proceeds. [read post]
6 Jun 2012, 4:52 am
Here, the Court of Appeals noted that the issue of authentication in Michigan trials is governed by Michigan Rule of Evidence 901(a), which state that the “requirement of authentication . . . as a condition precedent to admissibility is satisfied by evidence sufficient to support a finding that the matter in question is what its proponent claims. [read post]
31 Mar 2010, 3:36 am
See Priest v. [read post]
3 Sep 2021, 2:25 am
GermanyMax Mosley v. [read post]
11 May 2015, 11:01 pm
See, e.g., United States v. [read post]
20 Dec 2010, 9:45 am
[w]hile we cannot erase the scourges or broken promises of our past, we will move ahead together in writing a new, brighter chapter in our joint history.? [read post]
29 May 2023, 9:01 pm
As Justice Alito’s 2017 majority opinion in Matal v. [read post]
25 Jul 2022, 5:54 pm
From today's decision of the Minnesota Court of Appeals in Johnson v. [read post]
