You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Singer v. Freedland

Citations: 723 N.W.2d 870; 477 Mich. 952Docket: 132422

Court: Michigan Supreme Court; November 28, 2006; Michigan; State Supreme Court

Original Court Document: View Document

Narrative Opinion Summary

The Michigan Supreme Court issued an order on November 29, 2006, regarding case number SC: 132422, involving plaintiff-appellee Ryan Singer and defendants-appellants Michael Freedland, M.D., Michael Freedland, M.D. P.C., and Visage Spa, L.L.C. The Court granted the motion for immediate consideration but denied the application for leave to appeal the November 1, 2006 order from the Court of Appeals, stating that the issues presented do not warrant review by the Supreme Court at this time. Additionally, the motion to stay the trial court proceedings was also denied. The order was certified by Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court.

Legal Issues Addressed

Denial of Leave to Appeal

Application: The Michigan Supreme Court exercised its discretion to deny the application for leave to appeal, suggesting that the case did not present issues significant enough to merit further review by the highest state court.

Reasoning: The Court granted the motion for immediate consideration but denied the application for leave to appeal the November 1, 2006 order from the Court of Appeals, stating that the issues presented do not warrant review by the Supreme Court at this time.

Denial of Motion to Stay Trial Court Proceedings

Application: The Supreme Court's denial of the motion to stay indicates that the trial court proceedings will continue, underscoring the court's decision to not intervene in the ongoing litigation at the lower court level.

Reasoning: Additionally, the motion to stay the trial court proceedings was also denied.

Immediate Consideration in Appellate Procedure

Application: The Michigan Supreme Court granted the motion for immediate consideration pertaining to the appellate process, indicating a prompt review of procedural aspects without necessarily addressing the substantive issues.

Reasoning: The Court granted the motion for immediate consideration but denied the application for leave to appeal the November 1, 2006 order from the Court of Appeals, stating that the issues presented do not warrant review by the Supreme Court at this time.