Legal Opinion
McCartney v. Attorney General
Michigan Court of Appeals
Decided December 18, 1998No. Docket 201052PublishedCited by 26 opinions
1Per curiam
Plaintiff appeals as of right from an Emmet Circuit Court order granting defendant Attorney General’s motion for summary disposition and denying plaintiff’s motion for summary disposition pursuant to MCR 2.116(C)(10). Plaintiff initiated this action because of defendant’s failure to provide six documents, which plaintiff had requested pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (foia), MCL 15.231 et seq.; MSA 4.1801(1) el seq., relating to the Governor’s negotiations with three Indian tribes regarding casino gambling. We affirm.
The six documents fall into two categories: those that were…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Fisher v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- State Ex Rel. Clark v. JohnsonNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1995
- State Ex Rel. Stephan v. FinneySupreme Court of Kansas · 1992
- State Ex Rel. Stephan v. FinneySupreme Court of Kansas · 1994
- Narragansett Indian Tribe v. StateSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1995
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by26 opinions
- Saratoga County Chamber of Commerce, Inc. v. PatakiNew York Court of Appeals · 2003
- In Re Costs and Attorney FeesMichigan Court of Appeals · 2002
- Saratoga County Chamber of Commerce, Inc. v. PatakiAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2000
- Attorney General v. Public Service CommissionMichigan Court of Appeals · 2001
- Saratoga County Chamber of Commerce, Inc. v. PatakiAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.