Tag Archives: Michigan Court of Appeals

Payments on Open Accounts for the Sale of Goods are Subject to the 4 Year Statute of Limitations

Where your business has open accounts with customers, it is important that any attempts at collecting payment be made timely. Although the normal rule allows breach of contract actions to be commenced within six years, where the breach of contract on an open account is based on the sale of goods, it must be filed [...]

Breaking: Saurman Reversed

The Michigan Supreme Court this afternoon issued a short (two page) Order that reversed the Court of Appeals opinion in Residential Funding Co. v Saurman, which I discussed previously. The Saurman opinion in the Court of Appeals had ruled that Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (“MERS”) could not foreclose by advertisement in the State of [...]

Non-conforming Uses: You Might Want to Leave Them Alone

In zoning parlance, a non-conforming use is a property use that would violate the current zoning regulations, but which existed before the current zoning regulations were in place. One might also say that the existing use of the property is “grandfathered.”  In order to be recognized as a non-conforming use, the property owner must show [...]

Non-Economic Damages in Tort: Real Property is Special

Under the common law systems that have developed in Great Britain and the United States, real property has been held in high esteem. Land, due to its uniqueness, and scarcity has unique doctrines that the law only applies to it. Tort law and property law often collide with each other. Personal and real property often [...]

Remedy Without a Contract: Unjust Enrichment Part 2

In the previous installment of this two part series, we discussed the concept of unjust enrichment and under what circumstances it can be raised.  Unjust enrichment is not available where an express contract exists. In Premer, the Michigan Court of Appeals confirmed how to properly state a claim for unjust enrichment. In order to state [...]

Remedy Without a Contract: Unjust Enrichment Part 1

In this two part series we will discuss the contract remedy of unjust enrichment. This first installment will explain the basic concept of unjust enrichment. Part two will discuss how to plead and calculate unjust enrichment. For those not familiar the intricacies of the legal world, legal jargon may seem like a foreign language (and [...]

MERS Can’t Foreclose By Advertisement

In a significant ruling, a divided panel of the Michigan Court of Appeals recently ruled that Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc (“MERS”) is not statutorily permitted to foreclose a mortgage by advertisement. MERS was a corporation created by several large mortgage lenders to ease the assignment of loans in the residential marketplace. Rather than record [...]

Reason No. 101 Why You Should File A Property Transfer Affidavit

In a unanimous decision, a panel of the Michigan Court of Appeals ruled that a municipality is barred from uncapping the taxable value of a property in future years, so long as the transferee properly filed a Property Transfer Affidavit in the year of transfer. In Michigan Properties, LLC v Meridian Township, the Michigan Court [...]

Michigan Consumer Protection Act Does Not Provide Protection for Businesses that are Consumers

The Michigan Consumer Protection Act provides consumers with protection against many unfair business practices.  However, the Act only applies to “the conduct of a business providing goods, property or service primarily for personal, family or household purposes …”  The Michigan Court of Appeals has previously ruled that the protections of the Act do not apply [...]

Separate Appeal of Attorney’s Fees and Costs

The Michigan Court of Appeals decided an interesting procedural issue regarding the appeal of post-judgment orders awarding or denying attorney’s fees. In Mossing v. Demlow Products, Inc. (2010), the trial court denied an award of attorney’s fees and costs to the defendants.  This occurred after the plaintiff had already filed an appeal, and the defendants [...]