Whether courts interpreting state rules and regulations must defer to the legal interpretation of the state agency responsible for promulgating those rules and regulations.

Whether the trial court properly denied defendant's motion to suppress cell-site location information.

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the trial court's order granting defendants' motion for summary judgment based on lack of proximate cause.

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in holding that defendant, a negligent truck driver, had adequate time and means to avoid injuring plaintiff, a contributorily negligent pedestrian.

Whether the Court of Appeals erred by vacating the neglect adjudication of a juvenile whose sibling was abused.

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in vacating an order of summary judgment and whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the state statutory claims.

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in reversing the trial court's order denying a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, where the jury determined that homeowners' chickens were not household pets and therefore were prohibited by a restrictive covenant barring poultry.

Whether escalating conflict and an unwillingness to communicate for the welfare of the child constitutes a substantial change in circumstances supporting a modification of a child custody order.

Whether plaintiff was contributorily negligent as a matter of law when his risk of being struck by a golf ball at a driving range was open and obvious.