Ann Arbor, MI
Appeals Lawyer at Ann Arbor, MI
Practice Areas: Appeals, Family ... +3 more
OUTCOME: My client won.
The trial court had ruled in my clients favor with regard to an erroneous payout by a Trustee. The Respondents appealed claiming the Trust was unambiguous and justified the bank's payout. The Court o ... f Appeals affirmed the trial court.
OUTCOME: My client obtained peremptory relief on an application for leave to appeal challenging an award of retriactive child support.
The trial court granted retroactive child support beyond the date upon which the motion to modify child support was sent to my client. We filed an application for leave to appeal and won peremptory re ... lief.
OUTCOME: My client won.
Joint tenants hold equal and undivided interests in a parcel, with a right of survivorship. When a joint tenant dies, the deceased’s interest does not descend to heirs. Instead, the entire ownership re ... mains in the surviving joint tenant or tenants. This transfer occurs automatically upon the death of the joint tenant. Michigan recognizes two types of joint tenancies: (a) the standard form, which can be unilaterally severed; and (b) a joint tenancy with express words of survivorship in the granting instrument which cannot be unilaterally severed. The recent Michigan Supreme Court of Jackson v Estate of Green, involved a dispute between two joint tenants, one of whom sought to partition the properties held by both joint tenants. While the matter was pending before the Court, the joint tenant seeking a partition suddenly died. The Michigan Supreme Court ruled that the joint tenancy at issue was a “standard joint tenancy” because the deed granting them a joint tenancy did not include express language identifying the parties as having a “joint tenancy with full rights of survivorship”. As a result, the Court held that the joint tenancy could be severed by one of the parties without the consent of the others. However, the Court also ruled that the severance occurred only upon a Court’s Order. Merely filing a Complaint in Court did not sever the joint tenancy. Therefore, the decedent’s estate had no interest in the subject property upon the decedent’s death. Instead, the Court ruled that the title to the subject property vested in the surviving joint tenant immediately upon the other joint tenant’s death. This case not only explains at what point in time a partition action severs a joint tenancy, but highlights the importance of using express words of survivorship in the granting instrument if the parties intend to secure their rights of survivorship.
OUTCOME: My client won and was reunited with his daughters.
Plaintiff was a natural father who sought return of the custody of his two daughters from a third person, plaintiff's sister. The trial court refused to hold a hearing on plaintiff’s petition and twice ... dismissed his complaint. The Court of Appeals reversed and remanded for an evidentiary hearing on the children's best interests. Following the evidentiary hearing, Mr. Yount and his daughters were reunited.
OUTCOME: My client won on appeal.
My client sold his tax preparation business pursuant to a written agreement. The purchasers breached the agreement in numerous ways including but not limited to failing to make all payments. Followin ... g several months of intense litigation, a jury ruled in favor of my client. The purchasers appealed on several issues.
OUTCOME: My client won and the trial court was reversed.
Client appealed as of right the trial court’s order denying its motion to confirm sale after the sale of foreclosed property. Specifically, my client challenged the trial court’s ruling that because th ... e liability of the individual guarantors was not included in the judgment of foreclosure, the guarantors could not be held liable for the deficiency that existed after the foreclosure sale. Because the individual guarantors were brought into the foreclosure action under MCL 600.3160 and because this provision allows a court to order the payment of a deficiency by any person besides the mortgagor who secures by obligation the mortgage debt after the foreclosure sale, the Court of Appeals reversed.
OUTCOME: My client obtained a reversal of the trial court's ruling limiting the interest on his legal malpractice judgment.
In this malpractice action my client appealed by leave granted from the circuit court’s order ruling that, to the extent plaintiff can prove he is entitled to pre-complaint interest as an element of hi ... s damages at trial, that interest will be limited to five percent simple interest and may not be compounded. The Court of Appeals reversed the circuit court’s ruling limiting pre-complaint interest plaintiff may recover to five percent, and its ruling that any interest recovered must be computed simply, and not compounded.
OUTCOME: My client won.
Petitioner and decedent had, without attorneys, drafted promissory notes and a security agreement in which the decedent agreed to apply all of his personal and real property assets to secure a loan fro ... m petitioner. Following decedent’s death, Nat’l City Bank, a competing creditor, objected to the petitioner's claim. In an appeal from the Oakland County Probate Court, the Michigan Court of Appeals held that Article 9 of the UCC did not reference transactions intended to create a security interest in real estate or land and that decedent's interest in vacant lots was, as a matter of law, not an interest in personal property but an interest in realty. The Court further held, however, that the petitioner had successfully asserted an equitable lien on the decedent’s real property through the security agreement because the agreement reflected a clear intent by the parties to use an identifiable piece of property as security for the promissory note.
OUTCOME: The Michigan Court of Appeals held that the open and obvious doctrine is inapplicable to an ordinary negligence claim as distinguished from a premises liability. My client won.
Plaintiff's decedent was killed in an accident on defendant's property while assisting defendant with repairs on a front-end loader. During the repairs, the bucket loader dropped, killing the decedent. ... In addition to alleging premises liability, plaintiff alleged that the defendant owed a duty to the plaintiff to use due care and caution in operation and control of the tractor and bucket. The Washtenaw County Trial Court dimissed plaintiff's claims under the open and obvious doctrine. The Michigan Court of Appeals held that the claim was one of ordinary negligence because the defendant's conduct was the alleged basis of liability, independent of premises liability. The Michigan Court of Appeals held that the open and obvious doctrine is inapplicable to an ordinary negligence claim as distinguished from a premises liability.
OUTCOME: Our client won, summary disposition was reversed.
In this no-fault action, plaintiff insured sought payment from his insurer of reasonably necessary medical expenses under MCL § 500.3107. The Michigan Court of Appeals held that the plaintiff was not r ... equired to submit direct evidence from the treating physician that the expenses incurred were both reasonable and reasonably necessary in order for the plaintiff to prevail. Rather, the jury is entitled to consider all the evidence, including circumstantial evidence and the permissible inferences arisng therefrom, to decide whether the plaintiff had proven by a preponderance that the expenses were reasonable and necessary. The insured was held to have presented sufficient circumstantial evidence that expenses incurred with two treating physicians were reasonable and necessary so as to survive the insurer's motion for directed verdict and motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict where testimony from a third treating physician permitted the jury to reasonably infer that the treatment rendered by the other two physicians was necessary and related to the accident, and where the insured provided the jury with itemized bills for every expense.
Ad
Transform legal challenges into solutions.
Connect now to review your situation.
