5 Common Misdemeanors Affecting People in Michigan
Originally posted on 11/08/2019
There are many different levels of crime and the consequences once someone has been charged with them. One bracket of crimes is known as a misdemeanor. Let’s go over this level of crime and some common...
PROBATE 44: The court held that the probate court did not err by declaring a will executed by the decedent invalid on the basis that she lacked testamentary capacity to execute it and that it was the product of petitioner’s undue influence.
Defendant and Decedent met in August 2017. In approximately November 2017, Decedent began talking constantly about wanting Defendant to take her to see an attorney for the purpose of changing her will. On March 19, 2018, Defendant filed a petition...
Michigan Expungement Law Updates For 2021
There has been a new laws regarding expungements for the state of Michigan.
Gov. Gretchen Whitmer signed legislation that expands the criteria for expungements related to traffic offenses, marijuana convictions, and minor...
FAMILY LAW 63: The court remanded the mother’s motion for modification of custody for an evidentiary hearing, concluding that her offer of proof and other information in the record warranted one.
Plaintiff and defendant were divorced in July 2017. The judgment of divorce stated that the parties would have joint-legal and joint-physical custody, and provided for a parenting-time schedule. Defendant filed many motions to change custody,...
DIVORCE 55: THE COURT HELD THAT THERE WAS INDISPUTABLE EVIDENCE OF A CHANGE OF CIRCUMSTANCES ALLOWING PLAINTIFF TO MODIFY HIS SPOUSAL SUPPORT
Plaintiff and defendant were divorced in February 2016. The divorce judgment, entered in February 2016, required plaintiff to pay defendant $3,500 per month in spousal support until her death, remarriage, or further order of the court. The judgment...
FAMILY LAW 62: The court held that the trial court erred by imputing income to Defendant and increasing the amount of child support he pays to Plaintiff.
The parties have two children, and in 2012 an order was entered requiring Defendant to pay $460 in monthly child support to Plaintiff. In 2018 and early 2019, there was a flurry of friend of the court (FOC) investigations, referee hearings and...
Are Juvenile Records Public or Can They be Expunged?
Rem
Originally posted on 12/06/2019
There is something in most people’s life they regret - if they could redo a moment, they would have done it better. Although there is no physical way to erase the past or redo past wrongs, there is a...
REAL ESTATE 70: The Court held that the trial court had subject-matter jurisdiction over the eminent domain complaint filed by Plaintiff.
Plaintiff filed an eminent-domain complaint requesting the condemnation of certain real property owned by Defendant. Plaintiff sought easements across the land for the purpose of rebuilding and upgrading an existing transmission line. On the basis...
REAL ESTATE 69: Holding that the trial court did not err when it declined to order plaintiffs to obtain a new land survey to mark the boundaries of the easement, the court affirmed the trial court’s order.
BACKGROUND
The instant dispute arises out of an express easement that was created by a 1989 consent judgment, which settled litigation between the parties’ predecessors in interest. After the parties’ mistake concerning the boundaries...
FAMILY LAW 61: FINDING NO ERRORS WARRANTING REVERSAL, THE COURT AFFIRMED THE TRIAL COURT’S ORDER THAT APPELLANT’S OUTSTANDING CHILD SUPORT ARREARAGE WAS STILL COLLECTIBLE.
BASIC FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Appellant and his ex-wife, Appellee, divorced in 1994. The consent judgment of divorce ordered Appellant to pay child support for his two children. In 2001, Appellant pleaded guilty to several criminal offenses...
Wills and Trusts
Originally posted on: 02/14/2014
Aldrich Legal Service provides legal advice and representation for residents in Plymouth, Ann Arbor, and Southeast Michigan. We also review recent legal cases to examine what took place and what we can...
FAMILY LAW 60: The court held that the trial court proceedings did not deprive defendant of his right to due process by entering ex parte orders.
PROBATE 43: The court affirmed the probate court order dismissing appellant’s petition to set aside the decedent’s 2018 will and admit his 2003 will for failure to create a genuine issue of material fact.
Appellant is one of three surviving children of Decedent, along with two other siblings. Decedent executed his last will in 2018, revoking a prior will from 2003. The 2018 will affirmatively made no dispositive provisions for appellant or her...
REAL ESTATE 68: Holding that plaintiffs-buyers’ allegations of fraud in this case arising from the sale of a residence did not preclude the trial court from granting defendants’ motion for summary disposition based on a release, the court affirmed.
This cause of action arises from plaintiffs’ purchase of a residence from defendant, who had rights in the house under a land contract from co-defendant, the legal owner of the house. Before the house was for sale, in January 2018, an upstairs...
PROBATE 42: The court held that the trial court did not err by granting defendant summary disposition of plaintiff-PR’s fraud and conversion action on the basis that it was barred by a prior judgment.
Plaintiff brought suit against Defendant alleging statutory and common law conversion. In July 2018, a global settlement was reached as to the various matters pending in the probate court. Relevant to this appeal, Plaintiff’s conversion claims...
REAL ESTATE 67: The court held that the trial court plainly erred by deciding that there was no genuine issue of material fact as to the mortgage interest rate.
BACKGROUND
Many of the facts are undisputed. In November 2007, Defendant entered into a mortgage agreement with Plaintiff, in which Defendant agreed to lend Plaintiff $500,000 secured by certain real property located in Livingston County. Both...
DIVORCE 54: The trial court abused its discretion in denying Defendant’s request for attorney fees without conducting a hearing or allowing her to support her request.
This case arises from the dissolution of plaintiff and defendant’s marriage. Defendant was a stay-at-home parent for the parties’ two children during the majority of the marriage. The children were adults at the time of the separation...
REAL ESTATE 66: Finding all of defendant-seller’s arguments unpersuasive, the court affirmed the trial court’s order granting judgment for plaintiff-buyer in this land contract dispute.
BACKGROUND
On May 5, 2014, the parties entered into a land contract for the sale of real property from defendant to plaintiff. In the land contract, plaintiff...
REAL ESTATE 65: Determining that it could not conclude the trial court erred in its factual findings, and that it did not err in reforming a 2005 deed, the court affirmed the ruling that defendants were fee simple owners of the disputed 50-foot area
This case arose from a real-property dispute between brothers, as well as their respective wives. After a bench trial, the trial court rendered its findings of fact. The trial court determined that plaintiffs did not prove that excluding the...
FAMILY LAW 58: The trial court did not err by denying defendant-father’s motion to change custody and modify his parenting time of the parties’ child without having an evidentiary hearing to determine if there was proper cause or a change in circums
This case arose from a custody and parenting-time dispute between plaintiff-mother and father over their minor child. After father failed to respond to the paternity complaint within the 21 days of receipt of the complaint, mother filed an affidavit...
DIVORCE 53: Although the court affirmed the trial court’s decisions to deny defendant’s motions to set aside the default and the default JOD, it vacated the portions of the default JOD as to the distribution of marital property, custody, parenting t
Plaintiff filed for divorce. Defendant filed an answer and a counterclaim for divorce. Plaintiff and defendant were both ordered to appear at the settlement conference. After defendant failed to appear, the trial court entered a default. Soon...
CONTRACT 15: The court held that the plaintiff received the benefit of his bargain with defendant. Thus, the trial court did not err when it granted defendant summary disposition as to his breach-of-contract claim.
Plaintiff contracted with Defendant for the installation of a geothermal heating and cooling unit for a home he was constructing. Plaintiff brought suit under theories of breach of contract and negligence—among other causes of action not...
SPOUSAL SUPPORT 1: The Factors that Determine Spousal Support.
The Court recognizes that the object in awarding spousal support is to balance the incomes and needs of the parties so that neither will be impoverished; spousal support is to be based on what is just and reasonable under the circumstances of the case.
DIVORCE 52: The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by awarding defendant ex-wife attorney fees.
Plaintiff and defendant divorced after a 36-year marriage. The divorce trial took place on October 1, 2014, and the court made a dispositional ruling from the bench on October 30, 2014. In the original dispositional ruling, the court erroneously...
REAL ESTATE 64: The Plaintiff met her burden of proof in her quiet title action to establish a prima facie case of title to the property at issue.
Plaintiff filed this action to quiet title to residential property she purchased, allegedly from defendant, in 2015, pursuant to a quitclaim deed. Intervening defendant claimed it acquired superior title to the property in November 2016 and also...
FAMILY LAW 57: The trial court did not err by denying defendant-mother’s motion to change custody and modify her parenting time of the parties’ child.
BACKGROUND
MC was born in the summer of 2014 at which time the parties resided together. In November 2014, plaintiff-father filed a complaint for sole physical and joint legal custody of MC. The complaint and subsequent motions presented highly...
WILLS AND TRUST 10: THE TRIAL COURT DID NOT ERR IN GRANTING APPELLEE’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY DISPOSITION
PERTINENT FACTS
This case concerns a dispute regarding the disbursement of Lakeside Trust Number 1 (“Lakeside Trust”), a trust created by appellee in relation to her mother’s trust, the EJA Trust . The grantor and settlor of the...
DIVORCE 51: Holding that the trial court erred by denying plaintiff-ex-wife’s requested calculation of interest payments, the court vacated the ruling and remanded the case.
The Plaintiff and defendant were married in October 1994. Plaintiff filed for divorce on February 4, 2004, and the trial court entered a consent judgment of divorce on January 5, 2005. The judgment referenced a property settlement agreement, under...
DIVORCE 50: WHILE THE COURT HELD THAT THE TRIAL COURT COMMITTED A LEGAL ERROR IN RULING THAT DEFENDANT’S PENSION WAS NOT A MARITAL ASSET, REVERSAL WAS NOT REQUIRED.
The parties were married in 1988 and have three adult children. During their marriage, the parties purchased the marital home in 1994 (1994 home) with marital funds. After plaintiff’s father died in 2006, the home next door to the marital home...
CRIMINAL 8: Charged with aiding and abetting of manufacturing marijuana.
The Michigan Medical Marihuana Act (MMMA), provides very limited circumstances in which persons involved with the use of marijuana, may avoid criminal liability. Accomplices to crimes may be prosecuted under an aiding and abetting theory.
PROBATE 41: MCL 700.5204(2)(b) is constitutional and does not infringe on a parent’s constitutional right to the care, custody, and management of his or her children.
FAMILY LAW 56: The court held that the trial court erred by failing to consider up-to-date information before ordering the change of the child’s ECE.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
The parties were involved in a romantic relationship when the minor child who is the subject of these proceedings was born on February 9, 2006. The parties did not live together and were never married. Approximately one year...
FAMILY LAW 54: The trial court’s conclusion that defendant-mother had a substance abuse issue was not against the great weight of the evidence and did not require expert testimony.
BACKGROUND
The parties have a minor child (ABF), who was twelve-years-old at the time of the proceedings. Defendant had primary physical custody of ABF until she...
REAL ESTATE 63: HOLDING THAT PLAINTIFF ESTABLISHED TITLE, AND THAT DEFENDANTS DID NOT SHOW SUPERIOR TITLE, THE COURT AFFIRMED SUMMARY DISPOSITION FOR PLAINTIFF IN THIS QUIET TITLE ACTION UNDER MCL 600.2932(1).
This case arises out of a property dispute between plaintiff and defendants. Plaintiff’s property and defendants’ property back-up against one another, so the back of plaintiff’s property borders the back of defendants’...
CRIMINAL LAW 7: Was initial contact with defendant a Terry stop?
The fact that the officers subjected defendant to a Terry stop does not automatically lead to the conclusion that the stop violated the Fourth Amendment.
REAL ESTATE 62: THE SUPREME COURT VACATED THE COURT OF APPEALS OPINION AND REMANDED THE CASE FOR RECONSIDERATION
BACKGROUND
The Court needed to determine the actual extent of an easement for a drain that runs across the southern edge of the plaintiff’s property. The releases at issue conveyed rights to fifty-foot strips of land on either side of the...
FAMILY LAW 53: The trial court erred by treating the parties’ GAL as an LGAL and denying the parties the right to question her at a hearing; however, the trial court did not err in requiring the parties to compensate the GAL for her services.
Plaintiff and Defendant were never married, but share a young son who was born in 2016. The parties have battled over custody, child support, and other parenting issues ever since. In the spring of 2019, the parties filed competing motions to modify...
FAMILY LAW 54: The court held that the trial court did not err by using the parties’ 2018 incomes when calculating child and spousal support.
The parties were married for over 20 years before plaintiff filed for divorce. At the divorce trial, the parties’ incomes were a source of contention. Plaintiff wanted the trial court to rely on the parties’ 2018 incomes when calculating...
The Difference Between Theft, Robbery, and Burglary
Original Post: 1/11/2019
Often, burglary, robbery, and theft are used interchangeably even though there are distinct differences between all of them. Though, what all three do have in common is they may involve the unlawful taking of...