Holding that it did not promote the children's best interests to continue their education in a school 14 miles from the home of defendant-Garrison (the father) and 28 miles from the home of plaintiff-Zalewski (the mother), the court reversed the trial court's order preventing Zalewski from enrolling the children in Allen Park public schools. Several years after the parties divorced, Zalewski obtained new employment in Dearborn, approximately an hour's drive from her then-home in Monroe. She purchased a home in Allen Park, moved with the couple's two daughters, and planned to enroll them in an Allen Park public school. Garrison lives in Monroe County. He filed a motion to block Zalewski from changing the children's school. Just as in Pierron, Zalewski's decision to move approximately 45 miles from Garrison's home did not alter the children's ECE with both parents. The distance between the "homes and between Garrison's home and the Allen Park school 'would only require relatively minor adjustments' in the parenting time schedule." Garrison begins work in Dearborn, very near Zalewski's home, at 5:20 PM four days a week. The timing and location of his work would make it convenient for him "to attend after school activities or take his daughters to dinner before his shift began," should they attend school in Allen Park. His "weekend parenting time schedule could remain largely intact, complimenting Zalewski's schedule which requires her to work two weekends out of three." Also as inPierron, the mother's home was "considered the primary residence for purposes of school enrollment." As the change in schools would not alter the children's ECE, the trial court correctly employed the preponderance of the evidence burden of proof. The question of who bore that burden was "not straightforward." Although Zalewski was within her rights to move to Allen Park, and Garrison moved to block the change in school enrollment, she bore the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that the change would be in the children's best interests. Once the trial court determined that the proposed change in schools would not alter their ECE and declared that Zalewski had to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the change was in the children's best interests, the trial court determined which best-interest factors under MCL 722.23 were relevant to the dispute. The court did not agree that every factor cited by the trial court was relevant to the resolution of this issue, or that the evidence preponderated in favor of maintaining enrollment at the school in Monroe.Â
A trial court did not clearly err by interpreting a parties' divorce consent agreement as requiring that they equally divide their 2012 tax refund
The trial court did not clearly err by interpreting the parties' divorce consent agreement as requiring that they equally divide their 2012 tax refund. The defendant-husband represented to the trial court and to the plaintiff-wife that their 2012...
There is no consideration where a party offered nothing more to satisfy a preexisting duty
Holding that the trial court properly granted the plaintiff summary disposition because the only alleged consideration for the modification of the parties' agreement fell within the preexisting duty rule and thus, could not be adequate...
A trial did not abuse its discretion by awarding the plaintiff-ex-wife 75% of her attorney fees incurred where plaintiff had an annual surplus of only $1,560, while defendant had $6 million in liquid assets
The court held that the trial did not abuse its discretion by awarding the plaintiff-ex-wife 75% of her attorney fees incurred in the trial court proceedings, or by finding she could bear 25% of the costs, and the defendant-ex-husband 75%, as to...
A loan modification agreement does not necessarily give rise to a contractual entitlement to an extension
Where the plaintiff sued defendant-HSBC Mortgage Services in an attempt to stop HSBC from foreclosing on his property, he could not rely on an LMA to give him a contractual right to an extension of his decreased monthly payment requirements. HSBC...
A trial court did not err in concluding defendant possessed a prescriptive easement validating her use of the property when a successor owner argued otherwise
The court held that the trial court did not err by granting summary disposition for the defendant in this action involving an easement across the plaintiff-trustee's property. Plaintiff's predecessor-in-interest executed a land contract in 1970,...
A trial court did not abuse its discretion by not granting a mistrial when a witness made a "volunteered" statement
Holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the defendant's motion for a mistrial based on a witness's "unresponsive, volunteered answer" to a proper question, the court affirmed his AWIGBH conviction. It also concluded...
A trial court did not err by finding untimely a defendant's objection to a default judgment as defendant did not establish good cause or a meritorious defense to set aside the default judgment
The court concluded that even if the trial court erred in finding untimely the defendant-property owner's objection to the plaintiff-city's proposed final amended default judgment, the error was harmless given that his objection was an attempt to...
A circuit court abused its discretion when it did not provide notice to a party that a record had been filed, then dismissed said party's right to an appeal as "untimely"
The circuit court abused its discretion when it dismissed as untimely the plaintiff's appeal as of right from defendant-Peninsula Township Zoning Board of Appeals' decisions regarding requested dimensional variances (Count I) because the circuit...
If a Defendant's waiver of constitutional rights in relation to a confession is not considered "voluntary", said confession may be supressed
The trial court properly suppressed the 15-year-old's confession to attempted murder after finding that she "did not knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waive her constitutional rights." The trial court viewed the videotaped interrogation. On...
A contract which contains ambiguity is sufficient evidence as to whether a genuine issue of material fact exists
The trial court did not err when it denied plaintiff-SPE's motion for partial summary disposition on its contract claim because the language in the parties' building contract was ambiguous, and there was evidence to show that the builder,...
A party challenging authenticity of signatures is an insufficient argument to avoid summary disposition - a party must produce evidence supporting such a contention
The court concluded that the plaintiffs failed to provide any admissible evidence to sufficiently counter the defendants' evidence that they electronically signed the contract for home inspection services, and that the plaintiffs' breach of...
A condo unit owner cannot sue a condo association for slipping on a sidewalk in the common area of the condo as he is a "co-owner" of said common areas
Holding that MCL 554.139 did not apply where the plaintiff was the co-owner of a unit in the condo development, and that he was neither a licensee nor an invitee, the court concluded that he was not owed any duty by the defendants under premises...
A parties acceptance of a case evaluation award did not dispose of all claims in the respective case
The court held that the plaintiff-bank's (Capital One) foreclosure claim survived the parties' case evaluation acceptance and thus, the trial court did not err in considering Capital One's summary disposition motion following the evaluation award....
A trial court properly terminated parental rights where at least one statutory ground for termination existed and it was in the children's best interests
The court held that the trial court properly terminated the respondent-mother's parental rights to the children where at least one statutory ground for termination existed and it was in the children's best interests. The trial court terminated...
In an action against the U.S. Forest Service, a Statute of Limitations did not begin to accrue on the date of final agency action, but on the date the property was acquired
The court reversed the district court's ruling that the six-year statute of limitations had run on the plaintiffs' action to enjoin the U.S. Forest Service from enforcing its "no gas-powered motorboat" restrictions on the lake on which they owned...
A trial court properly considered the best interests of the child, and as such properly set aside an order revoking an affidavit of parentage
The court held that the trial court properly found that the reason for setting aside its original order revoking an affidavit of parentage executed by the mother (Johnson) and her then significant other (Young) did not fall under MCR 2.612(C)(1)(a)...
A trial court properly granted summary disposition to the defendant in a foreclosure of an undeveloped parcel where res judicata or collateral estoppel do not apply
The trial court properly granted summary disposition to the defendant in this foreclosure of an undeveloped parcel. Defendant "initiated foreclosure by advertisement in early 2012, and conducted the sheriff's sale in March of that year." In June,...
A district court's incorporation of a settlement agreement into a dismissal order converted the order into a consent decree, regardless of the fact that it was not titled as such
Where the plaintiffs sued Kentucky and defendant-Sunrise, a child-care facility, for allegedly violating the Establishment Clause, the district court erred by finding that its dismissal order in the case was not a consent decree and by ruling that...
A claim on fraudulent causation is properly dismissed when evidence supporting a claim regarding "chain of causation" is absent
The court concluded that the absence of hazing did not preclude defendants-AKA and Nelson (an AKA regional director) from withdrawing plaintiff's membership rights pending an investigation. Further, their promise to conduct a fair investigation...
Although it is "correct that fraud requires a plaintiff to show that a party 'reasonably' relied on a supposed misrepresentation," it is "wrong that such reasonable reliance imposes a duty on a plaintiff to perform 'an investigation of all assertions
The trial court acted correctly when it prevented defendant-White from suggesting to the jury that plaintiff-Associated Construction was obligated to investigate his assertions that he could pay for the renovation project. Thus, the court affirmed...
An attorney is required to overcome the presumption of undue influence arising from the attorney-client relationship in order to receive the devises left to him and his family
Based on the binding precedent of Powers, the court reversed the trial court's order granting the appellees' summary disposition motion and remanded the case to the trial court for further proceedings. They contested the decedent's trust and will...
Landowners were entitled to challenge the establishment of a drainage district in the county on constitutional & statutory grounds
The court affirmed in part and reversed in part an order granting summary disposition in favor of respondents-Oakland County, the OCWRC, and the county's Water Resource Commissioner in this petition for writ of certiorari challenging the...
The "probate exception" does not divest a federal court of subject-matter jurisdiction unless a probate court is already exercising in remjurisdiction over the property at the time that the plaintiff files her complaint in federal court
Neither the "domestic-relations" nor the "probate exception" to federal diversity jurisdiction barred plaintiff-Chevalier from bringing tort and contract claims against her former spouse to recover on a series of unpaid loans. The...
Once a Defendant receives a ruling from a district court, he cannot challenge the decision again in federal court
Holding that the circuit court erred by reversing the district court's judgment of possession entered in favor of the plaintiff-bank and remanding this matter to the district court for an eviction trial, the court reversed the circuit court and...
A defendant's voluntary waiver of counsel must be fully informed in order to be valid
Agreeing with the defendant that "the trial court failed to engage in a meaningful assessment as to the knowing, intelligent, and voluntary nature" of his waiver of counsel, the court reversed his aggravated stalking conviction and remanded for a...
Where there is no bargained-for exchange between parties, an agreement cannot be enforceable
Concluding that the alleged agreement was not a valid contract, primarily due to a lack of consideration and mutuality of obligation, the court affirmed the trial court's dismissal of the plaintiff's claims based on the alleged agreement....
When acting impermissibly, an agent can be held personally liable
The court held that the trial court did not err in finding the cross-defendants-Trajcevski entities (Trajcevski) liable for certain royalties under a land contract and awarding treble damages and attorney fees. Plaintiffs sued the defendants-Furgal...
An oral agreement to a loan modification is not enforceable pursuant to the statute of frauds
Concluding that the alleged loan modification was oral, the court held that the trial court properly granted summary disposition in plaintiff-Comerica Bank's favor. Comerica sued defendants-Cheryl Maniaci and her company, Prickles, "seeking full...
An unlicensed builder cannot seek to 'collect' payments from a homeowner, but they are entitled to 'diminish' or 'defeat' actions filed against them by homeowners
Holding that the Court of Appeals properly found that MCL 339.2412(1) was inapplicable, but erred in finding that the contract between the plaintiffs-homeowners and the defendants-unlicensed builder (Willis) was void ab initio, the court affirmed...
A trial court did not err by forcing a party to carry out the terms of a settlement agreement
The court affirmed the trial court's order compelling the plaintiff to carry out acts necessary to complete the settlement and carry out the refinancing. The appeal arose out of a feud between two brothers, plaintiff and defendant-Terry Yaryan,...
Results of a hospital blood draw is admissible evidence against a Defendant in an OWI case
The court held that the trial court did not err in denying the defendant's motion to suppress the results of his hospital blood draw, in instructing the jury on reckless driving causing death, or in scoring his OVs. However, it was unclear whether...
The DOJ and FBI violated the Constiutional Rights of a group by improperly classifying the group as a "gang"
The district court erred by dismissing the plaintiffs-alleged gang members' (the "Juggalos'") constitutional claims based on lack of standing where they claimed they suffered violations of their constitutional rights at the hands of state and local...
If an insurance policy includes replacement coverage, the insurance company must do so, even if the cost to due so exceeds the policy limit
Holding that the trial court correctly determined that plaintiff's policy fell under § 2827 and thus, the defendant-insurer was "required to remit the policy limits to plaintiff without regard to whether the structure was actually repaired or...
Expenses for children must be determined to be reasonable and necessary before a parent can be ordered to split such expense with the other parent
The court vacated the trial court's order awarding confinement expenses to the extent it required the defendant-father to reimburse the plaintiff-mother for out of network costs, and remanded the matter to the trial court to determine whether the...
A court did not err by granting Summary Disposition where Plaintiffs were not denied due process
The court held that the trial court did not err by granting the defendant-county's motion for summary disposition and quieting title in favor of the defendant-management company (PJM) or by dismissing the plaintiffs' case as to all defendants. The...
It is not improper to terminate parental rights if the parent had numerous opportunities to properly care for the child and never took advantage of the opportunities
Holding that the trial court did not clearly err in finding that termination of the respondent-father's parental rights was proper under § (g) and that termination was in the child's best interests, the court affirmed the order terminating his...
An order entered by a Friend of the Court referee cannot be upheld if it violates procedural and substantive law
The court held that the FOC referee erred by changing primary physical custody of the child from the plaintiff-mother to the defendant-father because her order was issued and entered in violation of multiple procedural rules and substantive...
An auto insurance company is entitled to rescind or void a policy; however in certain circumstances they must return premiums paid by the policy holder
Holding that plaintiff-Auto-Owners did not waive its right to rescind or void the policy, and that it was entitled to rescind the policy even if the misrepresentations were innocent, the court affirmed summary disposition for Auto-Owners. However,...
A court must carefully and thoughtfully consider whether arrangements less intrusive than a conservatorship will adequately protect an individual's property as well as their autonomy
Because it was "definitely and firmly convinced that the probate court erred" in finding that the evidence satisfied the criteria for a conservatorship to be appropriate under MCL 700.5401(3), the court reversed the order establishing a...
In order to challenge zoning referendums, a person must be a citizen of the county where the vote is up for referendum
Holding that the plaintiff-LLC lacked statutory standing to challenge the results of the zoning referendum election under MCL 600.4545 because it was not a citizen of the county, the court reversed the trial court's order denying the intervening...