Thompson v. Enz
Michigan Supreme Court
1Per curiam
Refer to Thompson v. Enz (1967), 379 Mich 667.
Upon second review we are confronted hy two intervenient facts of significant importance. One *106has been established persuasively by testimony and exhibits taken and received since our opinions on first appeal were released and our subsequent order of April 3, 1968 was entered (for a copy of that order, see the appendix hereof). The other consists of enactment pendente of specific amendments of the Inland Lakes and Streams Act of 1965, No 291, effected by PA 1968, No 7.
The evidentiary fact to which allusion is made consists of controlling proof that…
Also in this document: Dissent.
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Thompson v. EnzMichigan Supreme Court · 1967
- Sheffield Car Co. v. Constantine Hydraulic Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1912
- Culy v. UphamMichigan Supreme Court · 1903
- Herpolsheimer v. A. B. Herpolsheimer Realty Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1956
- L'HOMMEDIEU v. SmithMichigan Supreme Court · 1958
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Rockwell v. Crestwood School District Board of EducationMichigan Supreme Court · 1975
- Chemetron Corporation v. McLouth Steel CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1975
- Opal Lake Ass'n v. Michaywé Ltd. PartnershipMichigan Court of Appeals · 1973
- Greenspan v. RehbergMichigan Court of Appeals · 1974
- Beulah Missionary Baptist Church v. SpannMichigan Court of Appeals · 1984
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.