People v. Mungo

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that the “essential requirement of the term ‘actual controversy’ under [MCR 2.605] is that plaintiffs plead and prove facts which indicate an -8- adverse interest necessitating the sharpening of the issues raised”
• overruling Lee v Macomb Co Bd of Comm’rs, 464 Mich 726; 629 NW2d 900 [2001]
• “[W]henever a litigant meets the requirements of MCR 2.605, it is sufficient to establish standing to seek a declaratory judgment”
• a litigant has standing if he or she has a special injury or right or has a substantial interest that will be detrimentally affected in a manner different from the citizenry at large

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).