734-359-7018
Now Accepting New Clients!
Blog

REAL ESTATE 89: RM had not included any language in the deed providing that the property was a joint tenancy with full rights of survivorship, the property instead became a tenancy in common.

This case involves a probate dispute regarding ownership interest in real property following FK’s death. The parties do not dispute the relevant facts.

FK and his wife sold the property at issue to their daughter, RM, for $50,000, and the sale was memorialized in a deed recorded in 2000. RM thereafter financed the construction of a two-unit condominium on the land, and FK moved in to one unit so RM could take care of him because of his age and infirmities.

According to RM, in 2008, she and FK were each being charged a garbage collection fee. However, she became aware that only one collection fee would have to be paid if they were both listed on the deed, which would be helpful since FK was on a limited income. As a result, RM executed a quitclaim deed conveying her interest in the subject property to herself and FK for $1.00.

Deed

RM drafted the deed without seeking counsel and mistakenly believed that, if either she or FK died, the property would fully pass to the surviving tenant. FK’s will provided that if his wife predeceased him—which she did—the personal representative of his estate should sell any residual property that he owned and divide the cash proceeds equally among his surviving children.

After FK’s death in 2019, RM attempted to refinance the property, but she discovered from the title company that she only held one-half interest in the property, with FK’s estate owning the other one-half share.

Because RM had not included any language in the deed providing that the property was a joint tenancy with full rights of survivorship, the property instead became a tenancy in common where each tenant owned an equal share of the property that did not pass to the other tenant upon death. RM contacted her six siblings about the mistake in the deed and stated that all siblings, but WH agreed that RM was the sole owner of the property.

Probate Proceedings

RM petitioned the court to allow her, as personal representative, to transfer the estate’s one-half property share to herself based on error in preparing the deed. WH opposed the petition, arguing that the deed created a tenancy in common, that FK’s interest in the property passed to his estate upon his death, and that pursuant to FK’s will, she was entitled to her equal share of the proceeds from the property as a beneficiary of FK’s estate. The other five siblings consented to RM’s petition for transfer of the property and submitted affidavits in support of the petition.

Court Order

After hearing arguments, and after the parties agreed that the facts were not in dispute, the probate court ordered reformation of the deed, concluding that there was no evidence that the parties intended for FK to have any real interest in the property. The court’s order provided that RM, in her role as personal representative, could correct the 2008 quitclaim deed to add the language “with Full Rights of Survivorship” and could record a new deed transferring any property interest that FK may have had to herself.

Help with Real Estate Transactions

Our attorneys represent clients in all areas of real estate. At Aldrich Legal Services, we draft of real estate deeds, including quit claim deeds. We provide guidance to make sure proper language is included. When you have questions or need assistance with a real estate transaction in Michigan, contact us to schedule a consultation.

MICHIGAN REAL ESTATE 95: Property owners did not place a condition upon the delivery of the deed; rather, they delivered the deed to themselves.

When the delivery of a deed is contingent upon the happening of some future event, title to the subject property will not transfer to the grantee until the event has occurred. However, in this case A and J did not place a condition upon the delivery of the deed; rather, they delivered the deed to themselves, then deposited the deed with their attorney with the instruction to record the deed only upon the happening of a future event, thereby placing a condition only upon the recording of the deed.

MICHIGAN PROBATE 57: Brother granted permanent guardianship of siblings.

At a multiday hearing to address the extension of the guardianship, the eldest children, the mother’s relatives and friends, and school personnel testified regarding the mother’s care of the children, appellant’s treatment of and interaction with the children, and the eldest siblings’ role in aiding the mother to raise the children.

FAMILY LAW 88: The trial court found that the children did not have an established custodial environment with defendant because, before the separation, he did not have a large role in the children’s lives.

The trial court credited plaintiff’s testimony that, before the parties’ separation, defendant spent minimal time helping to care for the children, so its finding that the children would not have looked to defendant for guidance, discipline, the necessities of life, and parental comfort during that time was not against the great weight of the evidence.

FAMILY LAW 83: A trial court can terminate a parent’s rights and permit a stepparent to adopt a child.

A trial court has discretion to terminate a parent’s rights and permit a stepparent to adopt a child when the conditions of MCL 710.51(6) are met. MCL 710.51(6)(b) requires the petitioner to establish that the other parent had the ability to visit, contact, or communicate with the children, and substantially failed or neglected to do so for a period of two years.

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