Lawrence Washington, Jr. v. Governor

Washington · Michigan Supreme Court · October 27, 2020 · No. 159239; 159240

Summary

The Michigan Supreme Court considered applications for leave to appeal in consolidated cases arising from claims against state officials and agencies. The Court denied review because it was not persuaded that the questions presented warranted review, and Justice Clement did not participate due to prior involvement as the Governor’s chief legal counsel.

Court
Michigan Supreme Court
Writing for the Court
Per Curiam; Bridget M. McCormack; David F. Viviano; Stephen J. Markman; Brian K. Zahra; Richard H. Bernstein; Elizabeth T. Clement; Megan K. Cavanagh
Jurisdiction
Michigan
Decision date
October 27, 2020
Docket number
159239; 159240
Procedural posture
The Michigan Supreme Court reconsidered applications for leave to appeal after holding them in abeyance pending its decision in Mays v. Governor and denied review.
Standard of review
The Court denied leave because it was not persuaded that the questions presented warranted review.
Precedential value
published
Parties
Edward Kurtz, Darnell Earley, Jerry Ambrose, Gerald Ambrose, Mike Brown v. Hazim Gulla, Ikhalas Gulla, Heather Gulla, Holly Gulla, Heidi Gulla, Megan K. Cavanagh, Darrell Davis, Barbara Davis, Elisa Kline, Mason Kline, Elizabeth Eberhardt, Jimmy James, Larosa E. Patrick, Helen Chapman, Damarius Chapman, Sade Chapman, Dionte Chapman, Tajuana Chapman, Tashiana Chapman, Kyeira Howell, Lashonda Jones, Dorothy Chapman, Shamiya Chapman, Duquan Chapman, Harry Chapman, Michael Lymon, Deborah Chapman-Marshall, Frederick Marshall, Essie Chapman, Inez Marie Walker, Ronnie L. Walker, Shawana M. Walker, Steven W. Redmond, Jerome Chapman, Jeanette Chapman, Maurice Chapman, May J. Chapman, John W. Chapman, Bobbie Rodgers, Henry C. Biggs, Renita M. Coleman, Meleisa A. Betts, Angela Price, D’Anna N. Price, Aa’niyah Evans, Artayah Price, Bobby Dean Grace, Terry Gravelle, Marilyn Doney-Gravelle, Angelina Doney, Anne M. Hicks, Joshua Hicks, Laquantus Cardwell, Raven Neal, Romero Cardwell, Sirqron Cardwell, Kathleen Clifton, Carlton Butler, Daniel Clifton, Debbie Mitchell-Butler, Magnolia Younger, Ryan Younger, Gowon Younger, Tiesha Taylor, Damar­rion E. Taylor, Mariah A. Taylor, Kaniya Taylor, Paula Brown, Lawrence Washington, Jr., Taylor Washington, Morgan Washington, Chloe Washington, Madison Washington, Lawrence Washington, Aaron Swinger, Angela Way, Connie McNeal, State of Michigan, Governor, Department of Environmental Quality, Department of Health and Human Services, Dan Wyant, Ed Kurtz
Disposition
other

Topics

appellate procedureappellate jurisdictionadministrative lawenvironmental lawcivil procedure

Practice areas

appellate procedureadministrative lawenvironmental lawcivil procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the Michigan Supreme Court should grant leave to appeal after its decision in Mays v. Governor.

Holdings

  1. The Michigan Supreme Court denied the applications for leave to appeal because it was not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by the Court.

Key quotations

it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. (at 3)

Factual background

The source opinion contains no substantive factual findings; it addresses only whether the Michigan Supreme Court should grant leave to appeal in two cases involving claims against state officials and agencies.

Procedural history

The applications challenged January 24, 2019 judgments of the Michigan Court of Appeals. On July 2, 2019, the Michigan Supreme Court held the applications in abeyance pending Mays v. Governor. After deciding Mays on July 29, 2020, the Court again considered these applications and denied leave to appeal.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…