Michigan Oil Co. v. Natural Resources Commission

6 Citing cases

  1. Mich Oil v. Nat Resources Comm

    406 Mich. 1 (Mich. 1979)   Cited 6 times

    On appeal, the denial of the drilling permit for Corwith 1-22 was affirmed by the Ingham Circuit Court and by the Court of Appeals. Michigan Oil Co v Natural Resources Comm, 71 Mich. App. 667; 249 N.W.2d 135 (1976). On April 20, 1977, this Court issued an order denying Michigan Oil leave to appeal.

  2. State v. Chippewa Landing

    82 Mich. App. 37 (Mich. Ct. App. 1978)   Cited 3 times

    This section also provides that the rules will be promulgated in accordance with the Administrative Procedures Act of 1969, MCLA 24.201 et seq.; MSA 3.560(101) et seq. More than a year after Westervelt was decided by the Court of Appeals, another panel of the Court in Michigan Oil Co v Natural Resources Commission, 71 Mich. App. 667; 249 N.W.2d 135 (1976), lv den, 399 Mich. 892 (1977) (Justice LEVIN would grant leave to appeal), discussed the scope of the authority of the Department of Natural Resources to regulate utilization and conservation of all the state natural resources under the challenged statutory sections. The Westervelt holding that the statutory sections were unconstitutional was not mentioned by the Court.

  3. Belle Isle Grill Corporation v. City of Detroit

    256 Mich. App. 463 (Mich. Ct. App. 2003)   Cited 410 times
    Holding that a claim for unjust enrichment requires "the receipt of a benefit by defendant from plaintiff"

    The fact that a party's property interest "was in the first instance derived from a contract with the state does not and could not thereby exempt that property interest from the proper exercise of the state's police power." Michigan Oil Co v. Natural Resources Comm, 71 Mich. App. 667, 687; 249 N.W.2d 135 (1976). In Michigan Oil Co, supra, the plaintiff had leased land from the Department of Natural Resources for purposes of drilling.

  4. Orion Twp. v. State Tax Comm

    195 Mich. App. 13 (Mich. Ct. App. 1992)   Cited 6 times

    However, prior mistakes must be corrected, not compounded by continued error. See Michigan Oil Co v Natural Resources Comm, 71 Mich. App. 667, 683; 249 N.W.2d 135 (1976), aff'd 406 Mich. 1; 276 N.W.2d 141 (1979). Accordingly, we conclude that the tax commission erred in determining that a failure to award GM the requested IFEC would be discriminatory and that the circuit court correctly reversed the decision of the tax commission.

  5. Michigan Oil Co. v. Department of Natural Resources

    384 N.W.2d 777 (Mich. Ct. App. 1985)   Cited 6 times
    In Michigan Oil Co v Dep't of Natural Resources, 148 Mich. App. 745; 384 N.W.2d 777 (1985), a panel of this Court applied the equitable maxim of "equity abhors a forfeiture" to an oil and gas lease and held that the lessee was entitled to an extension of the lease's ten-year primary term.

    The commission's decision was appealed to the Ingham Circuit Court on June 11, 1974, and was affirmed on June 27, 1975. This Court affirmed the decision of the circuit court in Michigan Oil Co v Natural Resources Comm, 71 Mich. App. 667; 249 N.W.2d 135 (1976). The Supreme Court initially denied Michigan Oil's application for leave to appeal but granted it on reconsideration.

  6. NEW JERSEY ZINK v. COLO. MINED LAND

    738 P.2d 51 (Colo. App. 1987)   Cited 1 times

    Where natural resources are to be protected by the agency, it should be encouraged to rectify any errors so long as the modification is not prohibited by statute. Michigan Oil Co. v. Natural Resources Commission, 71 Mich. App. 667, 249 N.W.2d 135 (1976), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 980, 100 S.Ct. 482, 62 L.Ed.2d 407 (1976). Any modification so allowed must be based on facts which could not have been discovered before the original decision was rendered.