Volume 85 Issue 1

Volume 85 Issue 1

— Fall 2007—

Symposium: Corporate Corruption

Recent Developments in Combating the Bribery of Foreign Public Officials: A Cause for Optimism??
by John Hatchard

A Primer on Advancement of Defense costs: The Rights and Duties of Officers and Corporations?
by Richard A. Rossman, Matthew J. Lund & Kathy K. Lochmann

Case Digests

American-Indian Law – Taxation
Michigan General Property Tax Act is Not Valid Against Indian Reservation Land Allotted Under the 1854 Treaty Because Congress Did Not Expressly Authorize It.?Keweenaw Bay Indian Community v. Naftaly, 452 F.3d 514 (6th Cir. 2006).?
by Meredith Mullins

Constitutional Law – Inmate’s Constitutional Rights
Qualified Immunity Is Denied Where Inmate’s Rights Were Clearly Established at the Time of Violation. ?Clark-Murphy v. Foreback, 439 F.3d 280 (6th Cir. 2006).?
by Ellen Lee

Criminal Law – Accomplice Liability
A Defendant Who Intends to Aid, Abet, Counsel, or Procure the Commission of a Crime, Is Liable for That Crime as Well as the Natural and Probable Consequences of That Crime. ?People v. Robinson, 715 N.W.2d 44 (Mich. 2006).?
by Sean Wilkins

Criminal Procedure – The Requirement That A Detainee Be Brought to Trial Within 180 Days After Notice Is Sent to the Prosecuting Attorney Except When the Pending Criminal Charge Provides for Mandatory Consecutive Sentencing is Not Limited as Such Any Longer; The Rule Applies to Any Pending Charge Against Any Detainee.? People v. Williams, 716 N.W.2d 208 (Mich. 2006).?
by Loukas P. Kalliantasis

Family Law – Parental Rights?
To Bring a Claim Under the Michigan Paternity Act, If the Mother Was Married at the Time of Conception, the Father Must Prove that the Child Was Born Out of Wedlock by Overcoming the Presumption that the Child Was an? Issue of the Marriage by Clear and Convincing Evidence. ?Barnes v.?Jeudevine, 718 N.W.2d 311 (Mich. 2006). ?
by Jessicaq Dopierala

Health Law – Peer Review Immunity
The Peer Review Statute Does Not Bar Judicial Review of a Private Hospital’s Staffing Decisions and the Doctrine of Judicial Nonintervention Is Abolished.? Feyz v. Mercy Memorial Hospital, 719 N.W.2d 1 (Mich. 2006).?
by Farrah Arif

Tort Law – Governmental Immunity
The Shoulder Portion of a Highway Is Not Within the Scope of the Highway Exception, Shielding the Government from Tort Liability.? Grimes v. Michigan Department of Transportation, 715 N.W.2d 275 (Mich. 2006).
by Katherine Fortune

Tort Law – Dram Shop Act Statutory Presumption of Nonliability
The Standard for Rebutting the Statutory Presumption of Nonliability for All But the Last Establishment, Is Clear and Convincing Evidence of Visible Intoxication Requires Eye Witness Testimony. ?Reed v. Breton, 718 N.W.2d 770 (Mich. 2006).?
by Stephen L. Grajewski?

Tort Law – Products Liability
A Manufacturer’s or Seller’s Duty to Warn of Product Risks Extends Only to Material Risks Not Obvious to a Reasonably Prudent Product User.? Greene v. A.P. Products, 717 N.W.2d 855 (Mich. 2006).
by Ziyad I. Hermiz

Tort Law – Agency Liability?
A Michigan Employer Will Not Be Subject to Vicarious Liability Based on the Principles of Agency if its Employee Was Acting Outside the Scope of Employment. ?Szigo v. Hurley Medical Center, 716 N.W.2d 220 (Mich. 2006).
by Aaron J. Williams