Skip to main content

Nuculovic v. Hill

Citations

  • 783 N.W.2d 124

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that notice of an “occurrence” was not sufficient to comply with an unrelated statutory provision requiring written notice of a “claim”
  • noting the well-established rule that when reviewing a motion to dismiss based on MCR 2.116(0(10), only evidence that is admissible is considered

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Fort Hood, P.J., and Wilder and Borrello

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

28 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this 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.