Narrative Opinion Summary
The Michigan Supreme Court issued an order on April 3, 2009, regarding two cases involving plaintiffs Daniel Adair and others against the State of Michigan. The Court granted applications for leave to appeal the Court of Appeals' judgment from July 3, 2008, focusing on two specific issues: 1. Whether the prohibition of unfunded mandates under the Michigan Constitution (Const 1963, art 9, § 29) obligates the plaintiffs to demonstrate specific costs, either through the reallocation of funds or direct expenses, to qualify for a declaratory judgment. 2. Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to recover costs associated with maintaining the lawsuit as per Const 1963, art 9, § 32. The order was certified by Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court.
Legal Issues Addressed
Recovery of Costs under Michigan Constitution Article 9, Section 32subscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court considered whether plaintiffs are entitled to recover costs associated with maintaining the lawsuit under the constitutional provision.
Reasoning: Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to recover costs associated with maintaining the lawsuit as per Const 1963, art 9, § 32.
Unfunded Mandates under Michigan Constitution Article 9, Section 29subscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court examined if the prohibition of unfunded mandates requires plaintiffs to demonstrate specific costs to obtain a declaratory judgment.
Reasoning: Whether the prohibition of unfunded mandates under the Michigan Constitution (Const 1963, art 9, § 29) obligates the plaintiffs to demonstrate specific costs, either through the reallocation of funds or direct expenses, to qualify for a declaratory judgment.