649 N.W.2d 73
No. 121400 (5).Supreme Court of Michigan.
July 17, 2002.
On order of the Court, the motion to intervene is GRANTED. The complaint for superintending control is considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.304(E), we direct the clerk to schedule this case for oral argument as on leave granted. The parties are directed to file briefs and appendixes in the manner provided by MCR 7.306-7.309. The parties are directed to include among the issues briefed: (1) what duties, if any, of the “clerk of the circuit court” can be inferred from Const 1963, art 6, § 14; and (2) under the separation of powers principles of Const 1963, art 3, § 2, does the Legislature have the authority to specify the duties of the clerk of the circuit court?
204 N.W.2d 38 PEOPLE v. RAY Docket No. 12187.Michigan Court of Appeals. Decided September 27,…
562 N.W.2d 224 DETROIT EDISON COMPANY v PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION Docket Nos. 177054, 177055, 177062,…
376 N.W.2d 176 PEOPLE v BUTTS Docket No. 80186.Michigan Court of Appeals. Decided August 5,…
223 N.W.2d 652 PEOPLE v ZUNIGA Docket No. 17453.Michigan Court of Appeals. Decided October 21,…
308 N.W.2d 176 PEOPLE v SIDNEY SMITH Docket No. 50618.Michigan Court of Appeals. Decided March…
545 N.W.2d 18 PEOPLE v McELHANEY Docket No. 162330.Michigan Court of Appeals.Submitted November 15, 1995,…