Skip to main content
Federal & State Lawfederalstatelaw.com
Home/Federal/Cases
Michigan Supreme Court· 7/20/2004

Neal v. Wilkes

Citations

  • 685 N.W.2d 648
  • 470 Mich. 661

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • concluding that whichever lost-opportunity formula benefits the plaintiff the most in any particular case is the correct formula to be utilized
  • “riding an ATV . . . is an outdoor recreational use . . . within the meaning of the RUA”
  • \Plaintiff . . . is adding words to the act that simply are not there.\
  • The task in construing a statute is to discern and give effect to the intent of the Legislature.
  • \Plaintiff . . . is adding words to the act that simply are not there.\
  • \[N]either 'legislative acquiescence' nor the 'reenactment doctrine' may 'be utilized to subordinate the plain language of a statute.'\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Corrigan, Weaver, Taylor, Young, Markman, Kelly, Cavanagh

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

98 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

16 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named Neal v. Wilkes

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.