Civil Justice Opinions

The following is a small selection of opinions that I have authored for the Court. These, and all of my other opinions and orders, can be found at the Supreme Court website.

  • Mich Educ Ass’n v Secretary of State, 489 Mich 194 (2011) – A public school district’s administration of a payroll deduction plan that collects political contributions from its employees for a partisan political action committee runs afoul of Michigan law, which prohibits a public body from using public resources to make a contribution or expenditure for political purposes.
  • Pellegrino v Ampco System Parking, 486 Mich 330 (2010) – Decisions by a judge in selecting a jury to include, and to exclude, jurors must be undertaken without consideration of race.
  • Greater Bible Way Temple v City of Jackson, 478 Mich 373  (2007) – The Religious Land Use Act does not entitle a church to disregard the zoning policies of a community in order to rezone its property from single-family residential to multiple-family residential so that an apartment complex can be built in a neighborhood.
  • Goldstone v Bloomfield Twp Public Library, 479 Mich 554 (2007) – The Michigan Constitution which states that public libraries “shall be available to all residents of the state,” does not require each individual public library in Michigan to offer non-free book-borrowing privileges to resident.
  • 46th Circuit Trial Court v County of Crawford, 476 Mich 131 (2006) – The judiciary’s power to compel public funding for its own uses is restricted to those expenditures required to enable the judiciary to carry out its constitutional functions.
  • Lind v City of Battle Creek, 470 Mich 230 (2004) – Applying different standards in identifying ‘reverse discrimination’ policies than in identifying non-‘reverse discrimination’ policies violates the Michigan Civil Rights Act.
  • Nat’l Wildlife Federation v Cleveland Cliffs Iron Co, 471 Mich 608 (2004) – The constitutional responsibility of the judiciary is to act in accordance with the constitution and its system of separated powers, by exercising the “judicial power” and only the “judicial power,” and thus even with the acquiescence of the legislative and executive branches, the judiciary cannot exercise authority that is beyond the scope of the “judicial power” of the constitution.
  • Terrien v Zwit, 467 Mich 56 (2002) – A restriction in a deed precluding the operation of a “family day care home” in a residential subdivision is not violative of the “public policy” of our state because there are no “definite indications” in our law of any “public policy” against such a restriction. Indeed, there is considerable “public policy” to the contrary in support of the freedom of contract that affirmatively supports the enforcement of such a deed.

Comments are closed.