Schedule of Oral Arguments
2002-2003 Term

The following are summaries of cases granted leave to appeal by the Michigan Supreme Court that are awaiting oral argument before the Court's seven Justices during the term (Oct. 2002 - July 31, 2003). This page also provides a status of the case, and links to the Court's opinion or order in each case this session. Further information may be obtained by calling the Supreme Court Clerk's Office at (517) 373-0120. To help you select cases that may be of interest to you, the Court's staff has prepared the following synopses. These are simple summaries of complicated cases, and might not reflect the manner in which some or all of the Court's seven Justices view the cases. The lawyers may also disagree with regard to the facts, the issues, the procedural history, or the significance of their cases. For further details concerning these cases, you should contact the lawyers.



Current session briefs and opinions:

May 2003>>	April, 2003>>	March, 2003>>	January 2003>>
December 2002>>	November 2002>>	October 2002>>

Previous term 2001-2002: To view the previous term's briefs and opinions: Click Here>>

Search all: To search all Supreme Court and Court of Appeals Opinions: Click Here>>

NOTE: To view pdf files you must use Adobe Acrobat. Click icon to download a free copy:

MGTV cablecast schedule (link to MGTV): Cablecasts of the Michigan Supreme Court oral arguments are aired across the state on local MGTV stations. Channels may vary based on the cable television provider in your area.

May Session 2003:

Thursday, May 8, 2003
Case Name & Docket Number	Calendar Number	At Issue	Status
People v Gonzalez 120363 Click on docket number(s) to view Briefs in Acrobat	1	Despite the absence of a defense request, was it reversible error for the trial court not to instruct the jury on the dangers of accomplice testimony?  Was the witness in this case an "accomplice"? Was the credibility question "closely drawn"? Background>>	Opinion 7/2/03>>
People v Zubke 122183 Click on docket number(s) to view Briefs in Acrobat	2	The defendant pled guilty to a federal drug conspiracy charge while facing a state drug possession charge.  Does the federal conviction bar the state charge?  Is the federal conviction for the "same act" as the state charge? Background>>	Opinion 7/16/03>>

April Session 2003:

Tuesday, April 8, 2003
Case Name & Docket Number	Calendar Number	At Issue	Status
People v Watkins 120036 Click on docket number(s) to view Briefs in Acrobat	1	Was it ineffective assistance of counsel to have the court determine the degree of murder instead of proceeding to a bench trial? Was the error in compelling defendant to testify a "structural error" or a "trial error"? Background>>	Opinion 5/28/03>>
People v McNally 120021 Click on docket number(s) to view Briefs in Acrobat	2	May the prosecution point of the defendant's failure to volunteer information to the police at the time of his arrest, if an ordinary citizen could be expected to do so, even though the defendant was under no compulsion to speak? Background>>	Order>> 7/31/03 - Set for reargument and resubmission at Oct 2003 session
People v Petty 121564 Click on docket number(s) to view Briefs in Acrobat	3	Where a minor has been convicted as an adult, a judge must hold a hearing to decide whether to send the minor to prison, or to a juvenile disposition. At that hearing, the judge must consider certain factors in deciding whether to sentence the minor as an adult. How specifically must the judge address those factors? Did the judge in this case explain his decision sufficiently? Background>>	Opinion 07/17/03>> (Related Admin. Order 2003-39>> )
Barnowsky v General Motors 120768 Click on docket number(s) to view Briefs in Acrobat	4	A worker's compensation magistrate found that the plaintiff had physical and mental disabilities, but did not explicitly order the employer to pay medical expenses related to the mental disability. Is the employer liable for the medical expenses? Background>>	Order>> 7/22/03 Leave to appeal denied
People v Perks 120899 Click on docket number(s) to view Briefs in Acrobat	5	The defendant pled guilty to two offenses. Later, his probation was revoked at a contested hearing, and he was sentenced to prison. He seeks leave to appeal. Is his appeal by right, or only by leave of the court? Background>>	Order>> 7/31/03 Vacating and Remanding to Court of Appeals
Wednesday, April 9, 2003
Little v Kin 121037 Click on docket number(s) to view Briefs in Acrobat	6	Does an easement giving property owners riparian rights include the right to build a dock? Background>>	Opinion 7/9/03>>
Harvey v State of Michigan 121672 Click on docket number(s) to view Briefs in Acrobat	8	Outstate district judges claimed their right to equal protection right of the law was violated by a statute that treats judges of the 36th District Court in Detroit differently than other district court judges as to their retirement benefits. What level of constitutional review should be applied to this issue? Background>>	Opinion 7/16/03>>
AFSCME v City of Detroit 122053 122091 Click on docket number(s) to view Briefs in Acrobat	9	Are employees of the Detroit Housing Commission employees of the City of Detroit? Background>>	Opinion 6/17/03>>
In re J.K., Minor 121410 Click on docket number(s) to view Briefs in Acrobat	12	A child was removed from his mother's custody because of her drug problems. A trial judge later found that substance abuse was no longer a problem for the mother. The judge terminated the mother's parental rights, however, based on a lack of bonding between the mother and her child, and for the mother's alleged failure to solve that problem. The mother argues that the bonding issue was raised late in the proceedings and that termination was improper because she successfully completed the terms of a parent-agency agreement. Background>>	Opinion 5/20/03>>
Thursday, April 10, 2003
Anderson v Pine Knob Ski Resort 121587 Click on docket number(s) to view Briefs in Acrobat	7	Does the state's Ski Area Safety Act bar a claim by a skier who crashed into a timing shack at defendant's ski resort? Background>>	Opinion 7/16/03>>
Rakestraw v General Dynamics 120996 Click on docket number(s) to view Briefs in Acrobat	10	The plaintiff had a preexisting back condition. Work caused his pain to worsen. Is the aggravation of an preexisting injury's symptoms an injury for which worker's compensation benefits should be paid? Background>>	Opinion 7/30/03>>

March Session, 2003:

Tuesday, March 11, 2003
Case Name & Docket Number	Calendar Number	At Issue	Status
Wilkie v Auto-Owners Ins Co 119295 Click on docket number(s) to view Briefs in Acrobat	1	The case involves an interpretation of insurance policy language concerning underinsured motorist coverage. Is there a role for insureds' "reasonable expectations" in applying the policy language? Background>>	Opinion 7/16/03>>
Quality Products v Nagel Precision 119219 Click on docket number(s) to view Briefs in Acrobat	2	The plaintiff, a manufacturer's representative, solicited business from two machine tool suppliers expressly excluded from his territory under his contract with the defendant. He claims that the defendant knew of his actions but kept silent. Does the defendant's alleged silence waive a contract provision stating that the contract could only be modified in writing? Background>>	Opinion 7/31/03>>
Parkwood Ltd Dividend Housing Assn v MSHDA 120410- 120411 Click on docket number(s) to view Briefs in Acrobat	3	Does the Court of Claims, which hears claims against the state, have jurisdiction to decide a claim of entitlement to escrowed funds – or is the court's jurisdiction limited to claims for monetary damages? Background>>	Opinion 7/9/03>>
People v Mendoza 120630 Click on docket number(s) to view Briefs in Acrobat	4	Did the trial judge err by refusing to give an instruction on involuntary manslaughter in this second-degree murder case? Background>>	Opinion 6/20/03>>
Maskery v Board of Regents, U of M 121338 Click on docket number(s) to view Briefs in Acrobat	5	Is a university dormitory that is locked 24 hours a day a "public building" for purposes of governmental immunity? Under Michigan's governmental immunity statute, governmental agencies may be sued for injuries "resulting from a dangerous or defective condition of a public building." Background>>	Opinion 7/2/03>>
Wednesday, March 12, 2003
People v Cress 121189 Click on docket number(s) to view Briefs in Acrobat	6	Should a new murder trial be granted on the basis of newly-discovered evidence? Another person has confessed to the murder for which the defendant was convicted. Background>>	Opinion 7/9/03>>
People v Gottschalk and Silagy 121833-4 Click on docket number(s) to view Briefs in Acrobat	8	Does a special prosecutor have authority to initiate a criminal prosecution - or only to try a case started by the elected prosecutor? Background>>	Order 5/8/03 - Leave to appeal denied
Northville Twp v Northville Public Schools 120213 Click on docket number(s) to view Briefs in Acrobat	9	Where a local school district chooses a site for a new high school, is the district exempt from the township's zoning and land-sue authority? Background>>	Opinion 7/31/03>>
AMCO Builders v Team Ace Joint Venture, et al 120459 Click on docket number(s) to view Briefs in Acrobat	11	The trial judge entered a default judgment for the plaintiff after the defendants failed to produce a person for deposition as ordered by the court. Did the trial judge abuse his discretion? Background>>	Opinion 7/17/03>>
Thursday, March 13, 2003
DeRose v DeRose 121246 Click on docket number(s) to view Briefs in Acrobat	10	Is Michigan's grandparent visitation law unconstitutional? Background>>	Opinion 7/31/03>>
Jones v Dept of Corrections 120991 Click on docket number(s) to view Briefs in Acrobat	12	Michigan's parole statute states that a parole violation hearing must be held within 45 days of the day when the parolee has been returned or is available to be returned to a state correctional facility. In this case, the parolee was arraigned within 39 days, and he contested only one of the charges. However, a hearing on the third charge was not held until 66 days after charges were brought. Must the parole violation charges be dismissed because the hearing was not held within 45 days? Background>>	Opinion 7/2/03>>
In re C.A.W., Minor (FIA v Heier) 122790 Click on docket number(s) to view Briefs in Acrobat	13	Where a child has a legal father, may the child's putative biological father intervene in proceedings to terminate the legal parents' parental rights? Background>>	Opinion 7/23/03>>

January Session, 2003:

December Session, 2002:

Tuesday, December 10, 2002
Case Name & Docket Number	Calendar Number	At Issue	Status
Daniel v Dept. of Corrections 120460 Click on docket number(s) to view Briefs in Acrobat	5	The plaintiff suffered from depression after he was proved to have sexually harassed women on the job. Michigan's worker's compensation statute states that those who are "injured by reason of [their] intentional and wilful misconduct" may not receive worker's compensation. Is the plaintiff barred from receiving worker’s compensation benefits? Background>>	Opinion 3/26/03>>
Haynie v State of Michigan 120426 Click on docket number(s) to view Briefs in Acrobat	4	Where the deceased plaintiff allegedly suffered taunting and other hostile conduct because of her gender - but the comments and conduct were not sexual in nature – do those incidents support a claim for sexual harassment? Background>>	Opinion 6/11/03>>
People v Katt (Terry) 120515 Click on docket number(s) to view Briefs in Acrobat	6	The defendant was tried and convicted of criminal sexual conduct with two young children. At trial, a Protective Services worker testified about her interview with one of the children and his account of the abuse. Was it error for the trial judge to admit this testimony into evidence? Background>>	Opinion 5/30/03>>
(Calendar Numbers 7-10 heard together)
Taylor v Smithkline Beecham 120624 Click on docket number(s) to view Briefs in Acrobat	7	A 1995 Michigan statute provides that, if the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approves a drug, the drug's manufacturers and sellers may not be sued by people who claim damages from taking the drug. Is the statute constitutional? Background>>	Opinion 3/26/03>>
Taylor v Gate Pharmaceuticals 120637 120638 120639 120640 120641 Click on docket number(s) to view Briefs in Acrobat	8	A 1995 Michigan statute provides that, if the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approves a drug, the drug's manufacturers and sellers may not be sued by people who claim damages from taking the drug. Is the statute constitutional? Background>>	Opinion 3/26/03>>
Taylor v Medeva Pharmaceuticals 120642 120643 120644 120645 120646 Click on docket number(s) to view Briefs in Acrobat	9	A 1995 Michigan statute provides that, if the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approves a drug, the drug's manufacturers and sellers may not be sued by people who claim damages from taking the drug. Is the statute constitutional? Background>>	Opinion 3/26/03>>
Taylor v A.H. Robins 120653 120654 Click on docket number(s) to view Briefs in Acrobat	10	A 1995 Michigan statute provides that, if the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approves a drug, the drug's manufacturers and sellers may not be sued by people who claim damages from taking the drug. Is the statute constitutional? Background>>	Opinion 3/26/03>>
Wednesday, December 11, 2002
People v Clay 120024 Click on docket number(s) to view Briefs in Acrobat	1	The defendant assaulted a corrections officer while in jail on charges of carrying a concealed weapon (CCW). However, his CCW conviction was later reversed on the grounds that his arrest was unlawful. He was also charged and convicted under a statute that makes it a felony for a "person lawfully imprisoned" to assault a jail employee. Was the defendant "lawfully imprisoned" on the original charge, and should his assault conviction be reversed? Background>>	Opinion 5/30/03>>
People v Phillips 119429 Click on docket number(s) to view Briefs in Acrobat	11	A Michigan court rule requires parties in a criminal prosecution to turn over expert witnesses' reports to other parties upon request. Where expert witnesses have not created reports, can a trial court compel them to do so? Background>>	Opinion 6/25/03>>
Lapeer County Clerk v Lapeer Circuit Court 121400 Click on docket number(s) to view Briefs in Acrobat	12	This case presents a dispute over responsibility for records, filings, and other clerical matters in the family division of circuit court. The answer will affect Michigan's family courts. Background>>	Opinion 7/22/03>>
(Calendar Numbers 13-14 heard together)
People v Hawkins 120437 Click on docket number(s) to view Briefs in Acrobat	13	A search warrant was based on information from an unidentified informant; a trial judge later ruled that there was nothing to show that the unnamed source was credible or that his information was reliable. Should the evidence seized in the search based on the warrant be suppressed? Background>>	Opinion 6/20/03>>
People v Scherf 121698 Click on docket number(s) to view Briefs in Acrobat	14	Under the "exclusionary rule," evidence seized in an unlawful search is not admissible and must be excluded. The United State Supreme Court has recognized a "good faith exception" to the exclusionary rule in cases where police officers relied on warrants they believed were valid. Should the "good faith exception" apply where the defendant was arrested on a bench warrant that turned out to be defective? Background>>	Opinion 6/20/03>>
Thursday, December 12, 2002
People v Martin 121050 Click on docket number(s) to view Briefs in Acrobat	15	Through the Internet and by phone, the defendant arranged to meet a fictitious child prostitute, who was actually a detective posing both as the child and as a go-between for the defendant. Because the child did not exist, was it legally impossible for the defendant to solicit with intent to commit first-degree criminal sexual conduct? Must his convictions for that offense be reversed? Background>>	Order>> 01/28/03 - Leave to appeal denied
Gladych v New Family Homes 119948 Click on docket number(s) to view Briefs in Acrobat	16	Where the complaint was filed within the three-year statute of limitations, but the defendant was not served with the complaint until after the three years ran out, is the claim barred by the statute of limitations? Background>>	Opinion 7/01/03>>

November Session, 2002:

October Session, 2002:

Get the latest version of Internet Explorer. Some of the files on this site are PDF files. To view PDF files, you need Acrobat Reader. Download your free copy here.

Technical questions about this site should be sent to webinfo@courts.mi.gov.
Questions about the content on this site should be sent to msc-info@courts.mi.gov.