Legal Opinion

MacOmb County Prosecutor v. Murphy

Michigan Court of Appeals

Decided March 23, 1999No. Docket 199406PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Per curiam

In this case plaintiff Carl Marlinga, as Macomb County Prosecutor, brought this action pursuant to § 4 of the incompatible offices act, MCL 15.181 et seq.-, MSA 15.1120(121) et seq. The trial court found that defendant Sherri Murphy holds two incompatible public offices and granted summary disposition in favor of plaintiff. The trial court denied defendant’s subsequent motion to disqualify plaintiff. Defendant appeals by leave granted. We affirm.

Defendant is an elected trustee of Harrison Township. Defendant also holds the appointed position of “Delinquent Personal Property Tax Coordinator”…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. People v. DoyleMichigan Court of Appeals · 1987
  2. Auto-Owners Insurance v. HarveyMichigan Court of Appeals · 1996
  3. Indenbaum v. Michigan Board of MedicineMichigan Court of Appeals · 1995
  4. Contesti v. Attorney GeneralMichigan Court of Appeals · 1987
  5. Stajos v. City of LansingMichigan Court of Appeals · 1997

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. MacOmb County Prosecutor v. MurphyMichigan Supreme Court · 2001
  2. Meyer & Anna Prentis Family Foundation, Inc. v. Barbara Ann Karmanos Cancer InstituteMichigan Court of Appeals · 2005
  3. People v. MayhewMichigan Court of Appeals · 1999
  4. Michigan Education Ass'n Political Action Committee v. Secretary of StateMichigan Court of Appeals · 2000
  5. LaGrange City Council v. Hall Bros. Co. of Oldham CountyCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1999

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API