Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Michigan Chiropractic Council v. Commissioner of the Office of Financial & Insurance Services

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided June 28, 2006No. Docket 126530, 126531Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partMarkman, J.

I concur in both the analysis and the result reached by the lead opinion with respect to count I of the petition. However, with respect to count II, I do not believe that the traditional justiciability analysis that is normally applied to inquiries under Const 1963, art 6, § 1 is necessarily sufficient to dispose of the questions presented. Because I would order additional briefing and reargument on these questions, I cannot join in the lead opinion’s analysis and results with respect to count II.

I. BACKGROUND

Intervening respondents Farmers Insurance Exchange and Mid-Century Insurance Company…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Mistretta v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  2. Field v. ClarkSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
  3. National Wildlife Federation v. Cleveland Cliffs Iron Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 2004
  4. Burton v. Reed City Hospital Corp.Michigan Supreme Court · 2005
  5. Department of Natural Resources v. SeamanMichigan Supreme Court · 1976

15 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