Now Accepting New Clients!

BUSINESS LAW 15: Plaintiff filed a construction lien.

Plaintiff designs, fabricates, and installs food service equipment for restaurant and institutional use. Defendant operates a Mall, which includes retail stores and restaurants.

Defendant executed a lease of space at the mall, for the purpose of operating a restaurant. The restaurant’s chef approached plaintiff to provide design and installation services for the restaurant’s kitchen. Plaintiff fabricated and installed stainless steel equipment, such as a dishwashing area, a chef island, a cooking line, a salad prep station, cocktail serving stations, and a sushi station, much of which was attached to the walls with anchors or pinned to the floor.

Construction Lien

Plaintiff billed the restaurant $274,424.20 for the project, but it paid only $61,035.00 of that amount. Plaintiff filed a construction lien in the amount of $213,389.20, naming defendant as the owner of the property.

Plaintiff filed a motion for summary disposition under MCR 2.116(C)(9) and (10), requesting that the court foreclose its construction lien and enter judgment for plaintiff in the amount of $213,389.20. Defendant filed a response to the motion, asserting in part that under MCL 570.1107(1), plaintiff’s lien attached only to the restaurant’s leasehold interest, and not to defendant’s interest in the property.


Defendant’s counsel e-mailed plaintiff’s counsel, announcing defendant’s intention to evict the restaurant from the premises and to allow the restaurant to remove its equipment from the restaurant and inviting plaintiff to attend a potential walk-through of the premises to identify any equipment subject to its lien. The restaurant removed equipment and fixtures fabricated and installed by plaintiff from the premises.

No Agency Relationship

The trial court denied plaintiff’s motion for summary disposition. The evidence indicated that any improvements made to the premises by the restaurant were primarily for the benefit of the tenant, rather than the landlord, and were improvements essential to the restaurant’s business operations. The trial court also found that no agency relationship existed between defendant and the restaurant. Finding of implied agency requires a showing that the improvements are of substantial benefit to the lessor.

Litigating Business Matters

If you are a business owner facing litigation, obtaining the right legal representation is essential. At Aldrich Legal Services, you will work with an attorney who has the extensive litigation experience necessary to help you reach an effective resolution that protects your interests.

Contact Aldrich Legal Services

Speak to a Pro: (734) 404-3000

Three reasons to put a power of attorney in place

Originally posted on 11/08/2016 While no one wants to think of the unfortunate possibility of being incapacitated or of a time when we can't handle our own affairs, this circumstance is a real possibility. If something happens and this...

How to approach parents about estate planning

Originally posted on 12/09/2016 Family forms a strong foundation for many people's first and most intimate community. It is important to strengthen these first relationships so even uncommon questions become natural. For those...

PROBATE 44: Petition for Mental Health Treatment

Michigan’s Mental Health Code governs the civil admission and discharge procedures for a person with a mental illness. Specifically, MCL 330.1434 sets forth the procedure and content requirements for a petition for mental health treatment.

Should you get your criminal record expunged?

Originally posted on 04/12/2017 If you have been convicted of a crime, have served your sentence, and have followed all court recommendations, you should be able to put your past behind you and move on with life. Moving forward is critical...

Choosing the right executor for an estate

Originally posted on 05/28/2017 When people are thinking about planning their estate, they often think about trying to minimize the estate tax, keeping their will updated, and keeping items out of probate court; however, there is another...

Understanding how the Miranda warning works

Originally posted on 11/25/2016 Michigan residents who have seen television police shows or movies involving law enforcement have no doubt watched many dramatic scenes with officers quoting something to the effect of, "You have the...

PROBATE 42: Dissolution of professional corporation.

This case involves the estate of a doctor whose professional corporation also had to be dissolved upon his death. The personal representative of the estate sold the company’s assets but did not pay off the company’s debts before transferring the proceeds to the estate and distributing them to the heirs.

A basic introduction to wills

Originally posted on 10/31/2016 It can be difficult to consider the end of our lives when we are in good health. However, lives can change at any moment, so it is wise to be prepared for any situation that may arise. Despite the many...

REAL ESTATE 73: Quiet title action.

This case involves a dispute over real property located in Michigan. W and V who are D’s parents, acquired the property. In 1999, W and V conveyed the property to the Trust, to which W is the sole trustee, via a quit claim deed. At some point...

How Is Alimony Determined In A Michigan Divorce?

Originally posted on 06/22/2018. When filing for divorce in Michigan, you may seek alimony, spousal support, from their spouse whenever they require financial aid. A judge may order your spouse to pay certain alimony. However, it depends...

Is My Conviction Eligible for Expungement?

Originally posted on 10/11/2019. At one point or another, we have all made mistakes. For some people, those mistakes involved breaking the law. Convictions have a large impact on someone’s life. Beyond the sentencing ranging from...

PROBATE 45: The court held that the probate court did not err by granting summary disposition for Plaintiff, or by denying Defendant’s request for an extension of the discovery period, adjournment of mediation, and issuance of subpoenas and by dismi

This case arises out of competing petitions for probate. On November 19, 2018, Defendant initiated this case by filing a petition for probate, attaching Decedent’s death certificate and purported last will and testament, dated March 9, 2007,...

DIVORCE 57: Holding that the trial court’s factual findings were not supported by the record evidence, and thus could not stand, the court reversed, vacated the portion of the Amended Default JOD ordering defendant to pay $3,325 to plaintiff, and re

Plaintiff first testified that she and defendant purchased the marital home in 1995. At the time the first default judgment of divorce was entered in September 2017, plaintiff had the home appraised. The value of the home was determined to be...

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
and secure reliable and trustworthy representation today!
Get the Help You Need From a Team You Can Truly Count On: (734) 404-3000