Legal Opinion · Dissent

Scott v. Angie’s, Inc

Michigan Court of Appeals

Decided August 4, 1986No. Docket 79527, 83651, 83001Published

1DissentDanhof, C.J.

(dissenting.) I respectfully dissent from the majority’s holding that reversible error resulted from the judge’s absence from the courtroom. I do not approve of the judge’s practice, but am unable to find that reversible error arose in the circumstances presented in this case.

The majority correctly states the general rule described in Michigan case law, namely, the absence of the judge from the courtroom at any stage of trial will not be considered reversible error unless it is shown to have resulted in prejudice to the complaining parties. People v Morehouse, 328 Mich 689; 44 NW2d 830…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. People v. MorehouseMichigan Supreme Court · 1950
  2. People v. ClyburnMichigan Court of Appeals · 1974
  3. Bakhit v. ThomsenNebraska Supreme Court · 1975
  4. Wolfe v. GranoverMichigan Supreme Court · 1930

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

Powered by the Exa API