The Michigan Constitution Podcast
Attorney Tony Snyder reviews the Michigan Constitution
67 episodes
latest
monthly cadence
English language
https://tonysnyder.com/feed/podcast/
Episodes
Reading the feed…
Attorney Tony Snyder reviews the Michigan Constitution
Reading the feed…
The MI Court of Appeals throws out the conviction of the person trying to kidnap Gov. Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan.
This week we got one case opinion regarding Giorgio Webster v. Dr. Jeffrey Osguthorpe and Summit Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery. It’s not the underlying medical malpractice case that gets any attention, it’s the Michigan Court Rule which got amended during the 20-months of litigation that the Michigan Supremes addressed.
This week the Michigan Supreme Court handed down one Order in the case of the People of the State of Michigan vs. Allen Michael Sherrill. Five out of six justices denied Sherrill’s appeal from the decision made by the Michigan Court of Appeals (COA). But one justice, Justice Bolden, would have been willing to accept the appeal because she believes the Michigan COA screwed-up one of the four elements reviewed in this case. She believes that the burden shifts from the Defendant to the Prosecutor on element number three. Do you agree with three?
This week the Michigan Supreme Court gave us one case to review. It was The People of Michigan v. Clinton, a criminal case was arose from a contract dispute. The holding here is that Larceny By Conversion was not in play when a housing contractor gave a down payment to a heating & cooling contractor. When a private party contractual dispute arises, a Prosecutor needs to stay in their own lane and deal with actual, legitimate criminal offenses.
This week the Michigan Supreme Court gave us two cases to review. Stefanski vs. the Saginaw County 911 deals with the Michigan Whistleblower Protection Act (WPA), and whether or not the old school concept of Common Law could be incorporated into the MI WPA for the purposes of suing an employer. Stefanski said he was fired, not because it had too many unauthorized “no show” for work days, but because he was going to “blow the whistle” on his employers for gross negligence. But gross negligence isn’t a listed reason to be protected by the WPA. But it would be if the old common law practice were
This time, our one-off podcast will highlight three different administrative law cases. Don’t let the topic bore you, this is actually far more relevant to your day-to-day life than most cases will. That’s because almost every license issued to a professional in the State of Michigan is authorized and issued by your state government. For that reason, we will discuss: A United States Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals case making a determination whether the Michigan Constitution’s “Takings Clause” was implicated when the Edenville Dam collapsed in 2020, effectively evicting residents from their hom
As you’ll recall, the Michigan Senate sued the Michigan House of Representatives over nine legislative bills which passed both chambers of the Legislature in December, 2024. However, when the 102nd Legislature failed to present the bills to the Governor for her signature or veto, the current 103rd Legislature questioned whether it had the legal authority to do what the 102nd failed to do. We have a decision in the case. The Senate wins the bigger issue, the House got a few wins, too. Which Chamber do you believe was the bigger winner in the lawsuit? Listen to find out!
What is the difference between a user fee and a tax? The Michigan Supreme Court points out the difference (the hard way) for the City of East Lansing.
A lawsuit has been filed by the Michigan Senate against the Michigan House of Representatives. The lawsuit alleges that the House has failed to fulfill its constitutional duties, pursuant to Article 4, Section 33, by not submitting to the Governor nine (9) bills, as passed by the Michigan Legislature in 2024. However, the Presentment Clause of the Michigan Constitution may not say what the Michigan Senate is implying. The House contends it has done nothing wrong by taking extra time to review the 9 bills, to the contrary, it is satisfying the requirements the Constitution places upon it by ens
This week only produced one noteworthy court case, but it was a good one! We see a 5-2 mash-up of Democratic and Republican nominated justices both rule in favor of, and against, the Plaintiff in the case of River Crest Catering v. the Director of the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services. This was a straggling COVID-19 case which relied upon an Executive Order limiting dine-in services to 100 people or 50% capacity [whichever was smaller] and a closure time by 11:00 p.m. At the heart of this case is whether the case was moot, the actions an unconstitutional delegation of authority
This week the Michigan Supreme Court gave us three cases which I found quite interesting. They are as follows: Robert J. Kennedy v. MI Secretary of State–This case dealt with what to do when a candidate for office no longer wishes to run for office and wants to have their name removed from the ballot. Was it Politics 101 that the Secretary of State engaged in or was this a legitimately within the discretion of the SOS office? People v. Fleming–This fellow alleged he had ineffective representation of counsel when his attorney didn’t give the jury the option of a Voluntary Manslaughter convictio
This week the Michigan Supreme Court ruled 4-3 (4 Democrat nominated Justices, 3 Republican nominated Justices) in favor of Democrat Secretary of State and an election manual created by the Secretary of State’s office. Are contention was that the manual was in violation of Michigan Election law and should have (at a bare minimum) gone through the Michigan Administrative Procedure Act so has to have had public review and comment. This case was considered to be highly controversial because 1) The Michigan Supreme Court validated what is arguably unlawful actions taken by the SOS office; 2) It si
This week the Michigan Supreme Court ruled on one case Miller, Miller & Whitman vs. MI Department of Corrections (DOC). In a 7-0 decision, the Supremes determined that a third-party can bring a retaliatory claim, pursuant to the Michigan Civil Rights Act (MCRA) alleging they were improperly fired for being friends with a co-worker who had brought a different MCRA case against the DOC.
This week the Michigan Supreme Court ruled on two different cases: Insurance Companies vs. the Livingston County Road Commission and Long Lake Twp. v. Todd & Heather Maxon. The crux of the insurance companies versus the Livingston County Road Commission implicated both the Michigan Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and Attorney-Client Privilege. In the “Long Lake Twp” case, the Michigan Supreme Court had to determine whether or not the use of a drone over a person’s real estate, without a warrant, was an unreasonable search.
We continue our conversation of Article 1, Section 17. This time we are delving in the concept of due process. Article 1, Section 17: No person shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty or property, without due process of law. The right of all individuals, firms, corporations and voluntary associations to fair and just treatment in the course of legislative and executive investigations and hearings shall not be infringed. In this podcast we will learn: The difference between a Personal Protection Order (PPO) and an ex-parte PPO, a
We continue our conversation of Article 1, Section 17. This time we are delving in the concept of due process. Article 1, Section 17: No person shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty or property, without due process of law. The right of all individuals, firms, corporations and voluntary associations to fair and just treatment in the course of legislative and executive investigations and hearings shall not be infringed. In this podcast we will learn: You ensure due process, you are guaranteed an impartial decisionmaker; notice o
In this podcast, we will continue our conversation regarding Article 1, Section 17 and the protection against self-incrimination. In particular, we will discuss: Are you aware the government can (and does) use your right to not incriminate yourself, against you in court? We discuss that! What about the business you own? Did you know that the right against self-incrimination does not apply to your own business which you own, run and operate? We discuss that too!
Article 1, Section 17 reads as follows: “No person shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty or property, without due process of law. The right of all individuals, firms, corporations and voluntary associations to fair and just treatment in the course of legislative and executive investigations and hearings shall not be infringed.“ So what does that mean? In this podcast we will learn: When is a confession considered to be an involuntary confession, which the Defendant can retract? Can an offer of leniency be taken into account fo
In this one-off podcast we discuss cases I want to talk about. City of Warren v. MI State Construction Code Commission–Can the Michigan Legislature delegate is legislative making decision to an unelected board? That’s the power given to the MI Construction Code Commission when they adopt the construction codes to be used and enforced within the entire State of Michigan. But is that a power that Michigan Legislature should be required to implement? McGoldrick v. Holiday Amusement–Is it negligent for a ski resort to place tension wires necessary for tow ropes in areas where skiers might ski into
In this one-off podcast, we discuss ordinances and how they impact daily life. County of Marquette v. Northern Michigan University–Does the Michigan Construction Codes govern how student dormitories are to be constructed? Capital Region Airport Authority v. Charter Twp of DeWitt–Must the local airport comply with township ordinances when it wants to build buildings on its land? Burt Twp. v. MI Dept of Natural Resources–When the Department wants to build a dock for public uses, does the State have to comply with the local’s ordinance? Daley v. Twp of Chesterfield–Who decides if a garage violate
Premise liability is the number one money-maker for slip & fall lawyers. Fortunately in Michigan, there is something called the “Open & Obvious” doctrine which is used to help get lawsuit-happy litigants out of our court system. In this one-off podcast, we will discuss what it means and how certain statutes, regulations and codes can play a factor in helping us to determine whether the Open & Obvious doctrine applies.
From time-to-time, I will produce what I will call “One-Off” podcasts, which don’t really address the provisions of the Michigan Constitution…but instead, are cases I think you (the listener) might find interesting to learn about. This podcast is one such case. We’re going to get into the idea of a “Public Duty Doctrine” which is when a police officer will not be held liable for the crimes committed against another person. The theory here is that the police can’t be on the hook for crimes committed by a 3rd party against the victim. The other area of law we will discuss is the governmental imm
We will continue our conversation about the Right to Bail. In particular, we’ll discuss: Pre-Trial Bail versus Post-Conviction Bail How bail impacts your ability to leave the police station What is the Goldilocks approach to setting bail? What happens if the Michigan Constitution changes and caught between the old constitutional provision and the new provision.
§ 16 Bail; fines; punishments; detention of witnesses. Excessive bail shall not be required; excessive fines shall not be imposed; cruel or unusual punishment shall not be inflicted; nor shall witnesses be unreasonably detained. There’s been a lot of chatter about the notion of Bail Reform. Realistically, bail doesn’t need to be reformed, certainly not in the State of Michigan. But my guess is most people championing for this “solution in search of a problem” don’t understand how bail actually works. We’ll discuss that in great deal. But here’s a primer: So what is bail? What’s its purpose and
Michigan Constitution/Article 1/Section 15: Double jeopardy; bailable offenses; commencement of trial if bail denied; bail hearing; effective date. We’re finally bringing this topic in for closure. But before we do, we have a few more critical cases which we need to discuss.
