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

Appellant appeals from an order of the Probate Court denying his petition to reopen his deceased mother’s estate.

Under Michigan law, parties may acquiesce to a new property boundary line. Acquiescence is established when a preponderance of the evidence establishes that the parties treated a particular boundary line as the property line.

The trial court ordered that the child finish kindergarten at the school that he was attending and enroll in the school halfway between for the following school year beginning in the fall of 2017.

In this contest over the probate and non-probate assets of Decedent, appellate petitioned to set aside pour-over will and trust documents executed by Decedent

The day after the trial court entered its order, Defendant C quitclaimed his interest in the property to Defendant B, who then sold the property on land contract to new owners.

Before modifying an existing custody order, a trial court is required to find that the party seeking to modify the custody order has shown, by a preponderance of the evidence, proper cause or change of circumstances as set forth in MCL 722.27.

After the judgment of divorce was entered, plaintiff moved for relief from judgment, claiming that defendants-ex-wife and her attorney engaged in fraudulent conduct and that there was newly discovered evidence supporting that position.

Contracts can be divided into two categories: express contracts and implied contracts. An express contract is one where the intention of the parties and the terms of the agreement are declared or expressed by the parties, in writing or orally. Alternatively, a contract may be implied from the conduct of the parties, language used or things done by them, or other pertinent circumstances attending the transaction.

Your home is likely your most valuable asset, so it's extremely important to protect your interests during the buying or selling process. While real estate agents and brokers are trained to assist their clients through each step of buying or...

Plaintiff filed a six-count complaint against defendants for a violation of the anti-lockout statute, injunctive relief for illegal lockout, conversion, negligent infliction of emotional distress, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and for exemplary damages.

The court ruled that the husband’s home was a premarital asset belonging to him alone, denied the wife’s request for spousal support and awarded minimal attorney fees.

The primary goal when construing a will is to determine the intent of the testator.

With respect to a request to modify child custody, a trial court is required to determine whether there is an established custodial environment with one or both parents before making any custody determination.

An established custodial environment is established if over an appreciable time the child naturally looks to the custodian in that environment for guidance, discipline, the necessities of life, and parental comfort.

In Michigan, as in most states, the law gives people the chance to expunge, or erase, a conviction from their record.

In this case, the husband argues on appeal that the probate court abused its discretion by appointing a conservator to manage his wife’s estate and affairs under MCL 700.5401.

The 10-year statute of limitations on a claim relating to a property settlement in a judgment of divorce begins to run at the time the claim accrues and that the claim accrues when the money owing under the property settlement comes due.

This case arises out of the sale of residential property. Within a few months of purchase, plaintiffs experienced severe flooding of the house and surrounding property. At one point, there was nearly one foot of standing water in the living room.

Plaintiff and defendant were involved in a romantic relationship, but never married. After the relationship ended, plaintiff sued defendant, seeking repayment for $68,784.50 in payments he claims he made for her living expenses.

Under the EPIC, a “suitable” guardian is one who is qualified and able to provide for the ward’s care, custody, and control. When a preponderance of the evidence weighs against the suitability of the ward’s current choice for guardian, the probate court must remove that person as guardian.

In this case, defendant appeals order requiring him to pay plaintiff attorney fees in the amount of $22,000, consisting of $10,000 for plaintiff’s divorce attorney and $12,000 for a business attorney.

In this case involving a Living Trust, the husband, appeals as of right the probate court’s order granting partial summary disposition to their daughter. The order resolved claims relating to two family businesses, declared the wife disabled, and pursuant to the terms of the trust, removed the husband as successor trustee of the trust.

This case presents the question of whether a warrant is required for a police officer, not investigating any wrongdoing, to open the passenger door of a parked truck to ask whether the sleeping occupant of the truck would be able to drive the occupant’s intoxicated girlfriend home.

On January 6, 2017, Governor Snyder signed into law the package of bills that abolish dower rights in the State of Michigan, however, the bills do apply the right of dower to a surviving widow whose husband passed away prior to the effective date of the bills.

The only fact the trial court used to rule that defendant should receive 25% of the value was that he contributed and sacrificed little to the Book of Business and this was not a concerted effort.

Plaintiff moved to set aside the revised proposed QDRO, arguing that it was time-barred under the ten-year statute of limitations set forth in MCL 600.5809(3).

To prevail on a claim of adverse possession, plaintiffs must show that they possessed the disputed property openly, adversely, exclusively, and continuously for at least 15 years. A party making an adverse possession claim can meet the time requirement by tacking their possessory period to that of their predecessors in interest with whom they are in privity of estate.

In this case, Defendant appealed his conviction of operating a vehicle while intoxicated, third offense.

A plea bargain is an agreement made between the prosecutor and the defendant in which the accused person agrees to plead guilty or no contest in exchange for the prosecutor dropping the charges or recommending a lower sentence to the judge or...

In this case defendant (father) appeals the trial court denying his motion to modify custody of the parties’ three minor children.

In instances of trespass where injunctive relief and actual damages are not warranted, a plaintiff nevertheless is entitled to nominal damages. Because a trespass violates a landholder’s right to exclude others from the premises, the landholder could recover at least nominal damages even in the absence of proof of any other injury.

Under the Michigan Medical Marijuana Act, both an immunity provision (Section 4) and an affirmative defense provision (Section 8) offer protection against prosecution for the medical use of marijuana.

The Michigan Supreme Court found that defendant's private driveway was an area generally accessible to motor vehicles. Because defendant allegedly operated a motor vehicle in his driveway while intoxicated, this was probable cause for OWI.

Being arrested in Michigan is certainly not going to be a fun experience no matter what, but it can be easier when you understand exactly what will happen and why. Find out more about how you can get out of jail by posting bond.  What are...

Defendant appeals his conviction of unlicensed residential builder. The trial court sentenced to 18 months’ probation, and $6,300 in restitution.

Plaintiff ex-wife appeals trial court’s order awarding defendant ex-husband over $22,000 in attorney fees and costs incurred by defendant in addressing plaintiff’s contempt of court for violation of the parties’ divorce judgment.

The marijuana was found in his car’s trunk during a search that followed from a police dog alerting to the marijuana’s smell. Defendant argues that the trial court erred in finding that the search did not violate his rights under the Fourth Amendment.

Defendant argues that the trial court’s 60/40 distribution of the marital estate in plaintiff’s favor was inappropriately punitive. According to defendant, the trial court placed a disproportionate amount of weight on the parties’ respective fault, while ignoring defendant’s significant financial contributions to the marital estate.

When a child is in relative placement, a trial court must explicitly address whether termination is appropriate in light of the children’s placement with relatives.

A license to access a lake is a mere permission to do some act or series of acts on the land without having any permanent interest in it.