Wright v. Claus

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided August 29, 2006

Michigan Supreme Court · decided 2006-08-29

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently May 2013

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2006-08-29

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Philip L. WRIGHT, Pamela G. Wright, and Carl E. Welmers, Plaintiffs-Appellees,
v.
Timothy H. CLAUS, James G. Nihems, Jr., and Pro-Med Delivery, Inc., Defendants, and
Send Delivery, Inc., Defendant-Appellant.

Docket No. 131253. COA No. 258762.

¶1Supreme Court of Michigan.

August 29, 2006.

¶2 *305 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the April 11, 2006 judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court.

Philip L. WRIGHT, Pamela G. Wright, and Carl E. Welmers, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. Timothy H. CLAUS, James G. Nihems, Jr., and Pro-Med Delivery, Inc., Defendants, and Send Delivery, Inc., Defendant-Appellant.

Philip L. WRIGHT, Pamela G. Wright, and Carl E. Welmers, Plaintiffs-Appellees,
v.
Timothy H. CLAUS, James G. Nihems, Jr., and Pro-Med Delivery, Inc., Defendants, and
Send Delivery, Inc., Defendant-Appellant.