Legal Opinion

Hinkle v. Wayne County Clerk

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided December 10, 2002No. Docket 119566PublishedCited by 35 opinions

1Per curiam

This appeal arises from postjudgment proceedings in a dispute over a partial refund owed by a hospital that was overpaid for the care of plaintiffs decedent, Marilyn J. Hinkle-Calcutt.

We hold that MCR 2.614(A)(1), commonly described as the automatic stay provision, does not apply to voluntary payments in satisfaction of a judgment. Therefore, we reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals to the extent that it holds to the contrary.

i

While the plaintiffs decedent was a patient at Harper-Grace Hospital, two insurance companies made duplicate payments for her care. Harper-Grace was prepared to…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Veenstra v. Washtenaw Country ClubMichigan Supreme Court · 2002
  2. CAM Construction v. Lake Edgewood Condominium Ass'nMichigan Supreme Court · 2002
  3. Grievance Administrator v. UnderwoodMichigan Supreme Court · 2000
  4. In Re Contempt of CalcuttMichigan Court of Appeals · 1990
  5. Hinkle v. Wayne County ClerkMichigan Court of Appeals · 2001

3Cited by35 opinions

  1. People v. Hawkins; People v. ScherfMichigan Supreme Court · 2003
  2. People v. HawkinsMichigan Supreme Court · 2003
  3. Maskery v. University of Michigan Board of RegentsMichigan Supreme Court · 2003
  4. Glen Lake-Crystal River Watershed Riparians v. Glen Lake Ass'nMichigan Court of Appeals · 2005
  5. In Re Estate of MoukalledMichigan Court of Appeals · 2006

30 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