734-359-7018
Now Accepting New Clients!
Blog

REAL ESTATE 56: A forged deed is not merely voidable, but void.

In June 2012, plaintiff purchased real property in Michigan. Over a year later plaintiff was arrested on federal charges related to drug trafficking. Since his arrest, plaintiff has remained incarcerated.

During his first week in jail, he was visited by the mother of his children and his adult son.  The mother testified that plaintiff told her that the property was supposed to be for plaintiff and his children and that he wanted the children to grow up there. The mother also testified that plaintiff wanted the property out of his name because he was concerned that the feds would seize it the way that they had taken his vehicle and other properties.

Quit Claim Deed

Less than a week after plaintiff was arrested on federal charges, a quitclaim deed purporting to transfer the property from plaintiff to the mother’s brother was signed and notarized at a UPS store.

The notary did not have any specific recollection of the transaction, but she testified that she has never notarized a document that she did not physically observe the person listed on the identification sign. Because plaintiff was incarcerated at the time the deed was signed and notarized, it was impossible for him to have been the individual who signed the deed purporting to transfer his property to the mother’s brother.

Sale of Property

In January 2016, the mother’s brother quit claimed the property to the mother. And, in October 2016, the mother contacted a realtor to sell the property.

In November 2016, defendant saw the property listing. The defendant testified that before making an offer, he was aware that there was an issue with the title. Both realtors and defendant anticipated that any problems with the title would be resolved by closing. The title commitment was completed by November 14, 2016. Both realtors testified that they received the title insurance commitment before closing and that the commitment did not reveal any issues with the title that needed to be resolved.

The property was inspected on December 2, 2016. The closing occurred on December 8, 2016. Three days earlier, on December 5, 2016, plaintiff’s friend recorded an affidavit with the Oakland County Register of Deeds asserting that plaintiff was in federal prison on the date the disputed deed was allegedly signed and contending that the deed was forged. Plaintiff also told the real estate agent not to sell the house because the house belonged to plaintiff, not the mother.

Defendant began residing in the Southfield house in early 2017. Subsequently, on October 2, 2017, plaintiff filed suit to quiet title to the property, claiming a superior interest above the mother’s brother, the mother, and defendant.

Quiet Title in Defendant’s Favor

Following the bench trial, the trial court reached its decision. It found that defendant was a bona fide purchaser who acted in good faith and that plaintiff had conceded as much. Ultimately, the trial court held that although plaintiff had not executed the disputed deed, he had orchestrated it because he had wanted the transaction to occur and, therefore, authorized the execution of the disputed deed. The trial court dismissed plaintiff’s claim and entered a judgment quieting title in defendant’s favor.

The trial court found that plaintiff had orchestrated the transfer of the property to the mother’s brother with the aim of hiding the asset from the federal government. The court’s finding is supported by the timing of the transfer, which occurred within one week of plaintiff’s incarceration on the federal charges. That same week, plaintiff met with the mother and his adult son. The adult son’s name was the name on the identification used by the person who signed plaintiff’s name to the quitclaim deed.

Assistance with Quit Claim Deeds

Are you involved in a real estate dispute in Michigan? Are you seeking resolution to a property litigation matter?

If you are facing a residential or commercial real estate issue, seek the advice of an experienced and skilled real estate litigation attorney at Aldrich Legal Services.

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
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