In a docket that feels both tightly focused and wide-ranging, the Michigan Supreme Court will hear argument in 50 cases based on its orders issued through September 19, 2025. (More, of course, will be later added in the coming months to fill out the court’s 2025-26 term.)
The big picture (by the numbers)
- Total cases set for argument (so far): 50
- Civil: 23 (5 “leave granted,” 18 “MOAA” arguments on application)
- Criminal: 27 (7 “leave granted,” 20 “MOAA”)
Consumer protection, business regulation, and stare decisis
- Attorney General v Eli Lilly and Co (165961) — The Attorney General’s Michigan Consumer Protection Act suit becomes a vehicle for testing the scope of the statute’s exemptions and whether Smith v Globe Life and Liss read MCL 445.904(1)(a) too broadly—or should be retained under Robinson’s stare-decisis framework.
Premises liability and torts (is a restatement reset coming?)
- Molitoris v Saint Mary Magdalen Catholic Church (166699) and Radke v Truesdell (167162) — Two cases asking whether to abandon Michigan’s status-based entrant categories in favor of the Third Restatement’s reasonable-care standard, with Stitt (and the Court’s recent Kandil-Elsayed) as the fulcrum.
- Bowerman v Red Oak Mgt Co, Inc (167718) — Landlord and contractor duties under MCL 554.139(1)(a) and related negligence questions; Justice Hood not participating.
- Canty v Michael Chester Mason (167772) — Tort damages and mitigation collide with the no-fault act’s Medicare and fee-schedule landscape.
No-fault and auto-insurance architecture
- Swoope v Citizens Ins Co of the Midwest (166790) — Whether willing use of a vehicle “taken unlawfully” bars PIP under MCL 500.3113(a).
- Central Home Health Care Services, Inc v Michigan Auto Ins Placement Facility (167421) — Proof requirements for Assigned Claims Plan benefits, including whether the crash had to occur in Michigan.
- Goings, Sr. v Bobbie Jean Giacomantonio-Snow (167499) — Does violating MCL 500.3102(1) (nonresident coverage) foreclose noneconomic damages under MCL 500.3135(2)(c)?
- Abdulla v Auto Club Group Ins Co (167532-3) — Who counts as an “owner” under MCL 500.3101(3)(l)(i), and whether a claimant qualifies as a domiciled relative under MCL 500.3111 and MCL 500.3114?
Probate, family, and domestic relations edges
- In re Estate of Jerome E. Sizick (166921) — Mootness after the ward’s death and whether probate courts may consider prospective Medicaid benefits when setting protective spousal support.
- In re Estate of Jennifer L. Fowler (167501-3) — Are 401(k) assets and life-insurance proceeds disbursed to a trust reachable to satisfy estate claims?
- Blackman v Tyler David Millward (167867) — Limitations and procedures for revoking an acknowledgement of parentage when conception followed nonconsensual sexual penetration (including the hearing that’s required).
Public employment, education, and whistleblowing
- Zink v Genesee Intermediate Sch Dist (167913) — Is constructive discharge an “adverse employment action” under the Whistleblowers’ Protection Act, and should Joliet and Magee be retained or overruled?
- Warren Consolidated Sch Dist v Sch Dist of Hazel Park (167643) — How to navigate the Administrative Procedure Act of 1969’s declaratory-ruling path (and when a circuit-court declaratory action is proper).
Tax, property, venues, and the administrative state
- Knier, Powers, Martin, & Smith, LLC v City of Bay City (167593) — Whether a new commercial roof counts as an “addition” for taxable-value purposes.
- Nationwide Agribusiness Ins Co v Department of Treasury (167608) — Combined returns for a unitary group of insurers under the Income Tax Act.
- Department of Health and Human Services v NRK Rx, Inc (167917) — Which venue statutes control when the Attorney General sues for conversion, and whether special state-plaintiff venue rules apply when the Attorney General sues for a state department.
- Michigan Immigrant Rights Center v Governor (167300-1) — Whether MCL 600.6431’s notice regime applies to suits seeking prospective relief against state officers and if the claims were timely.
- Hogan v Wayne County (167262) — Prison Litigation Reform Act pitfalls: is dismissal for non-compliance with prejudice, and was the plaintiff a “prisoner” at filing?
- Smith v Beaumont Health (167716, 167720) — Trial-management discretion: applying Dean v Tucker factors before denying a late expert amendment; expectations for MCR 2.401(I)(2).
- Sherman v Progressive Michigan Ins Co (167826) — The proper standard of review for equitable rescission fact-finding, and whether a remand was required to rebalance equities in the first instance.
Energy, environment, and the Straits: Line 5 and public trust
- In re Application of Enbridge Energy to Replace and Relocate Line 5 (168335-9) — Did the Court of Appeals err by deferring rather than conducting Michigan Environmental Protection Act’s de novo review, and could the Michigan Public Service Commission limit the evidence on system-wide spill risk and history?
- In re Application of Enbridge Energy to Replace and Relocate Line 5 (168346) — Do Michigan Environmental Protection Act proceedings require the Michigan Public Service Commission to comply with the common-law public-trust doctrine, and, if so, what does a compliant analysis entail?
Criminal procedure recalibrations: interrogation, counsel, and trial management
- People v Cinecca Daquan Madison (167120) — The Court will reconsider People v Carpenter’s elimination of the diminished-capacity defense, and whether to retain it under stare decisis (Coldwater).
- People v Daren Donell Fenderson (167391) and People v Zebadiah Joseph Soriano (167373) — Voluntariness of Miranda waivers, the effect of police tactics, and whether counsel’s failure to obtain an intoxication expert was ineffective assistance.
- People v John Harold Sanders (167899) — Unlawful detention and the suppression remedy under Riverside v McLaughlin; confirming the vitality of Manning and voluntariness under Cipriano.
- People v Alexander James Haupt (167315) — Validity of counsel waivers and whether uncounseled intervals were “critical stages”.
- People v Richard Edward Klungle (168010-1) — Autonomy at trial: did counsel’s concession of guilt on a lesser offense violate McCoy v Louisiana (and how Nixon tempers that analysis)?
- People v Gwendolyn Josephine Alexander (168009) — Expert witness boundaries when testimony risks usurping the jury by relabeling evidence as “medical torture.”
- People v Michael Marc Morgan (167492) — Relevance and prejudice in excluding toxicology evidence and related expert testimony (with Feezel looming).
Sentencing, scoring, and retroactivity
- People v Edwin Lamar Langston (163968) — A major retroactivity and punishment case: whether Aaron’s malice rule was properly prospective-only and the remedy for pre-Aaron mandatory life imprisonment without parole felony-murder sentences without a malice finding. Justice Thomas not participating.
- People v William Motten, Jr. (167190) — Does Beck apply retroactively on collateral review? Justice Thomas not participating.
- People v Evan Taylor Armogeda (167760) — Must resentencing occur when a corrected grid range differs, despite a judge’s “same sentence anyway” statement (Francisco, Lockridge)?
- People v Timothy Joseph Walker (166722) — OV 15 scoring: may courts consider dismissed-charge conduct from the same transaction?
- People v Mario Cortize Jackson (167677) — Causation and who qualifies as a “victim” for OV 3 (100 points) when a relative’s death follows the offense.
- People v Kristopher Harlan Joesel (167705-6) — The omission of a voluntary-manslaughter jury instruction, and whether future-wage restitution for the deceased victim is authorized by the Crime Victim Rights Act.
Registration regimes and punishment: SORA “recapture” and Betts
- People v Roy John Klinesmith (164649) and People v James Ellis, Jr. (166766) — The Court will test Sex Offenders Registration Act’s “recapture” provision against ex post facto and cruel-or-unusual limits, how out-of-state residence affects ripeness, and what counts as the triggering offense—against the backdrop of Betts, Lymon, and Kardasz.
- People v Gary J. Shaver, Jr. (167736) — The retroactivity ripple effects of Betts for defendants whose cases are final.
Grand juries, mistrials, and double jeopardy
- People v Todd Douglas Robinson (167595) — After Peeler, were one-person grand-jury indictments void from the start, did Peeler announce a new rule, and how do the MCR 6.500 rules gatekeep collateral challenges?
- People v Devante Kyran Jennings (165764) — Should Michigan adopt a broader double-jeopardy bar on retrial after prosecutorial misconduct than Oregon v Kennedy?
Fourth Amendment, warrants, and good-faith
- People v Craig Lamont Buggs, Jr. (168594) — Nexus between suspected drug dealing and residences under Gates (with Sixth Circuit cross-currents) and whether Leon’s good-faith exception salvages the searches; Justice Hood not participating.
- People v Freddie Wilkins, III (167737) — Terry frisk limits and the automobile exception when probable cause intersects with under-21 Michigan Regulation and Taxation of Marihuana Act.
Marijuana, MRTMA, and probation conditions
- People v Marco A. Lopez-Hernandez (167529) and People v Danielle Heaven-Leah Hess (167895) — Do mandatory probation terms forbidding violation of “any criminal law of the United States” prohibit otherwise-lawful Michigan Regulation and Taxation of Marihuana Act marijuana use—or are marijuana limits only permissible as discretionary, case-specific conditions?
OWI, causation, and instructions
- People v Hunter James Hudgins (168160) — Clarifying proximate-causation jury instructions in OWI-death prosecutions under Schaefer.
Argument digest
Below is a downloadable digest detailing the Court’s oral argument orders through September 19, 2025.
Where you from?
This Michigan map highlights the originating trial court counties for the cases that will be argued.
Non-county fora includes the Court of Claims, Michigan Tax Tribunal, and the Public Service Commission.