Blog

Browse Our Blog for Knowledge on How to Protect Yourself Legally and to See Examples of How We've Achieved Results


Plaintiffs were entitled to judgment as a matter of law under the doctrine of equitable subrogation, the court remanded to the trial court with instructions to enter judgment for plaintiffs for $90,931.32 plus interest, costs, and attorney fees.

The case arose from the plaintiffs' sale of three commercial lots to defendant-RAAW Enterprises by land contracts. Defendant-RAAW Management later executed a promissory note to a bank. Guaranty agreements were also executed. As security for the...

In this case involving conspiracy to violate the Clean Air Act, the court held that the EPA was entitled to restitution under MVRA § 3663A(c) (an offense against property) when the government had no possessory interest in the land.

Defendant-Sawyer was prosecuted for failure to comply with the NESHAP for asbestos when salvaging a former industrial site. The court first determined that he waived his right to appeal his sentence under the terms of his plea agreement; thus, it...

Holding that the no-duty-to-advise rule from Harts as to the adequacy of coverage also applies to an independent agents, the court concluded that the trial court properly applied Harts and granted the defendants- agent summary disposition.

Plaintiffs alleged that the defendants were negligent for failing to advise them as to the adequacy of their renter's insurance, specifically as it related to the plaintiff-husband's tool collection. The policy at issue, under the heading "Special...

Holding that the trial court's factual findings were not clearly erroneous and that they supported its ruling that the defendant's confession was voluntary, the court concluded that the trial court did not err in denying his motion to suppress.

He was convicted of second-degree murder, Felon In Possession, and felony-firearm. He argued that his confession was not voluntary and thus, was inadmissible. However, the court disagreed. Defendant told the officers that he was 25 years old and...

The court held that the trial court properly found the child's ECE was with the plaintiff-mother alone. It did not find the trial court's conclusion that sole custody with plaintiff was in child's best interests to be against the weight of the eviden

The defendant-father challenged the trial court's findings that child's Established Custodial Enviornment (ECE) was with plaintiff alone. The trial court correctly articulated the standard, set forth in MCL 722.27(c). There was no dispute that the...

The trial court properly terminated the respondent-mother's parental rights to the children where the statutory grounds for termination were established by clear and convincing evidence and termination was in the children's best interests.

As to § (c)(i), the record reflected that more than 182 days elapsed between the entry of the initial dispositional order and the termination hearing. It likewise reflected that respondent failed to adequately address the conditions that led to...

The court held that the probate court did not abuse its discretion in finding the appellant had not pled a claim for reimbursement or in denying his request to amend the pleadings where there was undue delay and a repeated failure to cure the deficie

The parties-siblings disagreed as to the terms of their father's trust, which included a 300-acre farm. During their dispute, Daniel claimed that a settlement agreement between them did not preclude him from seeking compensation and reimbursement...

The court affirmed the trial court's rulings as to the disposition of a Harley Davidson motorcycle, the award of attorney fees to the defendant-ex-wife, and the denial of the plaintiff-ex-husband's request for attorney fees.

Plaintiff argued that the trial court clearly erred when it awarded defendant $5,700 for her share of the Harley. He contended that the parties had an agreement as to the Harley, pursuant to which he would be awarded the Harley and defendant would...

While the respondent-trustee (Juzenas) violated MCL 700.7814, the court concluded that the probate court abused its discretion in charging her for insurance and tax obligations that she paid from her own pocket and denying her request for reimburseme

Walter and Yvonne Massie established the trust in 1995. The only asset in the trust was their home. Petitioners charged that Juzenas was required to provide them an accounting every year beginning in 2009, and was required to provide notification...

The defendant failed to establish a change in circumstances to alter the child's established custodial environment or that the move was in the child's best interests, so the Court affirmed the trial court's denying his motion for sole custody.

First, he incorrectly argued that he was not required to present evidence as to PC or a CIC because the trial court's initial custody decision was based on an agreement between the parties. "A negotiated settlement agreement 'does not diminish the...

Holding that the property division was fair and equitable, but that remand was necessary for the trial court to recalculate the parties' income and recalculate the child support award, the court affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.

The parties raised several issues as to whether certain property was separate property or marital property subject to division. The defendant-ex-wife argued that her premarital Gentex stock was erroneously classified as marital property. The trial...

Holding that the trial court did not err in finding that statutory grounds supported terminating the respondent-mother's parental rights, or in finding that doing so was in the child's best interests, the court affirmed the order terminating her righ

She argued on appeal that there was insufficient evidence to support a statutory ground for termination due to the failure to offer her services and parenting time. The DHHS "sought termination at the initial dispositional hearing." Thus, it was...

Holding that willful absence is a factual question that may concern more than physical proximity & the court's decision to remove appellant as PR & replace her with a neutral 3rd party within possible outcomes, the court affirmed.

James died intestate 2012. He was survived by his spouse, appellee-Maggie, and 10 children. These consolidated appeals involved a dispute over the assets remaining in his estate. The primary issue in Docket No. 323387 concerned whether Maggie, who...

The court held that the probate court erred in construing MCL 700.2801(2)(e)(i) "to require proof that a spouse intended to give up his or her marital rights before he or she will be deemed not to be a surviving spouse" under the statute.

At the time of his death, Lyle was living with a woman with whom he had a long-term extramarital affair. The court agreed that "the phrase '[w]as willfully absent,' as used in MCL 700.2801(2)(e)(i), refers to physical absence." The physical...

The Court of Appeals held that the defendants weren't entitled to an affirmative defense under § 8 because neither of them served as a "primary caregiver" or "patient" when they operated the cooperative growing operation & medical marijuana dispensar

Thus, it affirmed the trial court's orders denying their motions to dismiss and preventing them from raising the defense. The trial court found Bylsma "failed to establish that he was entitled to immunity under § 4, and because his entitlement to...

Holding that the trial court properly found at least one statutory ground for termination and that termination was in the best interests of the children (JW and AW), the court affirmed termination of the respondent-mother's parental rights.

The trial court terminated her parental rights under § (g) after finding that she physically abused the children throughout the proceedings and that further services would not cure the problem. The record reflected that in 6/13, when "AW was about...

The court held that the trial court properly terminated the respondent-mother's parental rights to the children, and the respondent-father's parental rights to one of the children, where at least one statutory ground for termination existed.

It rejected the father's argument that the trial court erred by not holding the DHHS in contempt for failing to provide him with free therapy. It noted there was "no indication that the caseworker willfully defied the court's order to provide...

Don't let a bad decision, unfair contract, or a messy divorce get in the way of a promising future!
Contact the experienced team at Aldrich Legal Services today to schedule your free initial
consultation
and secure reliable and trustworthy representation today!
Get the Help You Need From a Team You Can Truly Count On: (734) 404-3000
734-237-6482
734-366-4405