Leland W. Carr

This case arose from a dispute over the interpretation of Paul R. Cray's 1929 will, which was resolved through a settlement agreement under the Dodge Act approved by the circuit court, with trustees later appealing aspects of the approval. Following the settlement, attorneys representing beneficiaries and several guardians ad litem petitioned for payment of their fees and expenses from the trust funds, arguing the services provided a common benefit to all interested parties. The trustees moved to dismiss, contending the court lacked jurisdiction and statutory authority to order such payments from estate assets. The court determined that equity principles, as recognized in cases like Trustees v. Greenough, allow recovery of fees for services benefiting multiple parties and that the circuit court's equitable jurisdiction extended to resolving the petitions, leading to affirmance of the denial of motions regarding the guardians ad litem but reversal for the attorneys' petitions, with directions on allocating fees across the trusts and between income and corpus.

propertyprocedure

This case concerned a creditor's lawsuit against officers of Chewning Motors, Inc., seeking to hold them personally liable under the Michigan general corporation act for the corporation's unpaid debts of over $9,800, incurred while the company was in default for failing to file required annual reports in 1960 and 1961. The defendants moved to dismiss, arguing the suit was untimely because it was filed more than two years after the alleged neglect to file the reports. The trial court denied the motion, finding the default period began after the statutory 10-day grace period following the May 15 filing deadline, but the Michigan Supreme Court focused on appellate procedure and dismissed the defendants' appeal for improperly claiming an appeal as of right rather than seeking leave as required by court rules.

business & regulatoryprocedure

The case involved a contract dispute between a singing group known as 'The Volumes' and their manager, defendant Ewing, over the division of proceeds from record sales and publishing rights. Three of the plaintiffs were minors, and the suit sought an accounting, receiver appointment, and contract termination after the manager allegedly failed to properly account for record sales. A consent decree was entered by the trial court resolving the accounting and allocating publishing interests (two-thirds to plaintiffs, one-third to defendant), but the defendant appealed, claiming he had not consented to the publishing terms. The Michigan Supreme Court held that the decree could not be treated as consented to by the defendant, vacated it, and remanded for further proceedings including a full rehearing on the accounting. The majority focused on the lack of actual approval for the decree's terms and the need to develop a proper record, while a dissent argued the appeal should be dismissed on procedural grounds.

business & regulatoryprocedure

The case concerned a dispute over a restrictive covenant on a lot in Hill Park Estates requiring residential use limited to a single dwelling house plus necessary outbuildings, with an exception allowing servants' quarters on the rear of the property. Plaintiffs, neighboring lot owners, sought to enjoin defendants from constructing an additional building, claiming it would function as a second residence in violation of the restriction. The court determined that the proposed structure, with one bedroom, living room, kitchen, and bath, could qualify as servants' quarters given the large size of the estate and was not inherently out of keeping with the covenant. It reversed the trial court's prohibition on completion but remanded for a decree limiting the building's use strictly to servants' quarters and garage, barring any use or sale as a second residence.

property

This case arose from a 1959 traffic collision at an intersection in Berrien County, Michigan, where plaintiff Metz's car struck the rear of a city-owned gravel truck driven by a municipal employee. Metz sued the City of Bridgman for damages, alleging the driver failed to stop at a sign and keep a proper lookout; the city denied negligence and asserted Metz's contributory negligence in speeding and failing to observe or avoid the truck. The jury returned a general verdict of no cause of action for the plaintiff and answered two special questions affirmatively finding her contributory negligence. On appeal, the Michigan Supreme Court affirmed the judgment, holding that objections to the special questions came too late, that trial evidence supported the contributory negligence findings, that the jury foreman had assented to the verdict, and that the trial court's instructions contained no material error.

torts & liabilityprocedure

The case involved defendant Dobine, who was convicted by a jury in Detroit recorder’s court of unlawful possession and sale of narcotics based on a controlled purchase by a police informant. On appeal, Dobine argued that he was denied due process because he lacked satisfactory counsel at the preliminary examination and that certain testimony should have been struck as implying prior drug transactions. The Michigan Supreme Court affirmed the convictions, holding that Dobine waived any defects in the preliminary examination by pleading not guilty in recorder’s court and that he had not been prejudiced by proceeding pro se with standby counsel available. The Court further ruled that the challenged testimony was not improperly admitted because no motion to strike was made, the statements were elicited on cross-examination, and the witness’s credibility was a matter for the jury to decide.

criminal lawprocedure

The case concerned the interpretation of a 1945 warranty deed reservation by defendant Keweenaw Land Association, which retained 'all ores and minerals' along with mining rights on land later acquired by plaintiffs Fisher. Plaintiffs sold sand and gravel from the property, prompting defendant to claim ownership via the reservation and file a lien notice. The trial court ruled for plaintiffs, quieting title in their favor, and the Michigan Supreme Court affirmed. The court reasoned that the reservation language, read in context with local underground metallic ore mining practices and the deed's provisions for surface caving and occupancy, was limited to metallic ores and did not encompass surface materials like sand and gravel, consistent with precedents treating such substances as part of the conveyed soil rather than reserved minerals.

property

This case involves a married couple who separated after 24 years of marriage, with the wife filing for separate maintenance alleging nonsupport and improper associations by the husband, and the husband counterclaiming for divorce on grounds of extreme and repeated cruelty based on the wife's accusations about his mental health and conduct that harmed his dental practice. The trial court dismissed the wife's bill, finding she had adequate personal assets including stocks and bank funds to support herself, and granted the husband a divorce after determining her statements to others and communications to him amounted to cruelty that precluded reconciliation. The appellate court affirmed the decree, agreeing that the evidence supported the denial of separate maintenance, the finding of cruelty by the wife, and an approximately equal property division with weekly alimony that would end upon remarriage.

family lawproperty

The case involved a state welfare department employee who sued Menominee County for injuries from a falling window shade in office space the county provided to the state in its courthouse under a contractual arrangement. The plaintiff alleged negligence in maintenance and the existence of a nuisance, but the trial court dismissed those counts on governmental immunity grounds after finding the county was performing a governmental function. The Michigan Supreme Court reversed, holding that the county was acting in a proprietary capacity by furnishing space under a contract for consideration rather than fulfilling its own public duties, so immunity did not apply. The court further ruled that the nuisance count was not merely repetitive of negligence and should also proceed, remanding for trial on the factual issues.

torts & liabilityprocedure

The case involved a defendant convicted of driving under the influence of intoxicating liquor under a city ordinance after police officers observed his car weaving but failed to advise him of his rights under a newly enacted state statute (MCL 257.625a) to obtain a chemical blood test and have the results considered in his case. The trial court in a de novo proceeding found him guilty and placed him on probation, despite the officers' admission that they did not inform him of these statutory rights and without evidence that he was incapable of understanding such an explanation. The Michigan Supreme Court reversed the conviction, holding that the statute's requirements are mandatory for the protection of defendants and that the record did not support the officers' belief that the defendant was too intoxicated to comprehend the advice, as he had driven several miles and responded coherently to officers. The court remanded with directions to set aside the verdict and sentence and discharge the defendant.

criminal lawprocedure

This case involved petitions filed to incorporate all of Flint Township in Genesee County as a new city, which were submitted to the county board of supervisors under Michigan's home-rule act. While the petitions were pending, the City of Flint used a statutory provision to annex by resolution 33 acres of its own vacant park land located in the township, with no residents. The board rejected the petitions on multiple grounds, including that the annexation had changed the described territory and that the map attached to the petitions was misleading and did not clearly show the proposed boundaries. Plaintiffs sought mandamus in circuit court to compel the board to call an election on incorporation, but the Michigan Supreme Court affirmed denial of the writ. The court held that the statute allowed the annexation to occur before final board action on the petitions, that conformity must be assessed at the time of such action, and that plaintiffs had not met their burden to prove the map satisfied statutory requirements.

procedureelections

The case involved defendant Wingeart, who was charged in Washtenaw County circuit court with armed robbery and rape arising from events on July 9, 1961. He waived a jury trial and raised a special defense of insanity at the time of the offenses. After presentation of undisputed facts about the crimes plus testimony from lay witnesses and psychiatrists on both sides, the trial judge issued a written opinion finding that defendant was sane when the acts occurred and therefore guilty on both charges. On appeal the Michigan Supreme Court affirmed the convictions, concluding that the trial judge's assessment of the evidence, including rejection of the insanity claim, was supported by the record and that the judge was not required to accept the defense psychiatrists' opinions. A dissent argued for reversal on grounds that the psychiatric evidence established insanity as a matter of law.

criminal lawprocedure

In Laird v. Rinckey, plaintiffs sought specific performance of an oral agreement to purchase one acre of land for $100 from defendants, who were buying a larger parcel on land contract, while defendants raised defenses including unpaid amounts and filed a cross-bill seeking foreclosure and other relief. After plaintiffs' counsel withdrew and the matter proceeded to a hearing on the cross-bill without plaintiffs' appearance, the trial court dismissed plaintiffs' bill with prejudice and granted relief to defendants. On appeal, the court vacated the decree and remanded for further proceedings, holding that due process was violated because the agreed facts established that plaintiffs received no actual notice of the rescheduled trial date, depriving them of an opportunity to appear and defend. The ruling emphasized that notice is required to satisfy due process in judicial proceedings. The topics selected are property and procedure.

propertyprocedure

The case concerned a joint checking account opened by Emerson Gower and his nephew Robert, with a signature card allowing withdrawals by either party but omitting language specifying payment to the survivor. After Gower's death, the bank permitted the nephew to withdraw the balance despite knowing of the death, prompting the estate administrator to sue the bank for failing to pay the funds to the estate. The trial court dismissed the claim against the bank, but the appellate court reversed, holding the bank liable. The court reasoned that Michigan statute requires explicit "or the survivor" language to create a joint tenancy with survivorship rights, and absent that phrasing or other evidence of intent, the account remained the decedent's property payable only to his estate upon death.

property

The case involved plaintiffs seeking recovery under a fire insurance policy issued by defendant Boston Insurance Company for buildings they were purchasing under a land contract, with the policy explicitly expiring on August 29, 1960. The insured property was destroyed by fire in January 1961, after which plaintiffs claimed the insurer was estopped from denying coverage due to a local custom among insurance agencies of providing notice of policy expirations, which was not followed here. The trial court directed a verdict for the defendant, and the Michigan Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the unambiguous policy terms controlled and that evidence of custom could not extend or create coverage beyond the contract's specified expiration date.

business & regulatoryproperty

This case involved former employees of Whiting Tubular Products and their union suing the company along with two related corporations, Novi Products and Dover Products, alleging breach of a collective bargaining agreement. The plaintiffs claimed third-party beneficiary rights to employment at new plant locations after Whiting ceased tube fabrication operations and transferred machinery, based on contract clauses preserving seniority and giving preference in the event of a plant relocation. The trial court entered judgment for the defendants following a jury verdict awarding damages to some plaintiffs. The Michigan Supreme Court held that the proofs were insufficient to establish each individual plaintiff's specific entitlement to employment at the new sites or to calculate damages, as the contract did not guarantee immediate hiring for all laid-off senior employees, and remanded for a new trial.

labor & employmentprocedure

The case involved a labor union seeking to distribute handbills at the entrance to a tenant store in a privately owned shopping center to promote the purchase of union-labeled clothing and discourage non-union products, with no underlying labor dispute between the parties. The trial court granted a permanent injunction allowing the handbilling, relying on Marsh v. Alabama to conclude that the shopping center's size and public access had transformed it into a quasi-public space where free speech protections applied. On appeal, the court reversed, ruling that the shopping center and its malls remained private property not dedicated to general public use, and that the owners could bar the activity to uphold tenants' lease rights to quiet enjoyment without violating constitutional guarantees. The core reasoning centered on the distinction from company towns, the promotional nature of the handbills, and the absence of any public dedication or labor conflict that would override property interests.

free speechpropertylabor & employment

The case concerned whether a homeowner's liability insurance policy covered damages awarded to an employee injured when his employer threw a lit firecracker into his workspace as a prank. The court held that the insurer was liable under the policy for the judgment obtained against the insured. The reasoning was that the relevant policy exclusions—for business pursuits, intentionally caused injuries, and injuries to employees covered by workers' compensation—did not apply to the facts, as the prank was not business-related, no intent to harm was shown, and the plaintiff was not an employee of the individual insured.

torts & liabilitylabor & employment

The case involved a challenge by air-conditioning equipment operators to an annual 'demand charge' imposed by Detroit's board of water commissioners on users of non-recirculating water systems for human or animal comfort, in addition to standard usage fees, with the charge escalating over time. Plaintiffs sought to enjoin collection and recover payments made after the Michigan Supreme Court previously ruled the charge unreasonable and arbitrary, violating due process. The court affirmed repayment, holding that the payments were made under duress due to the threat of service disconnection and that no written protest was required for such utility charges, unlike taxes. It distinguished the matter from cases involving discriminatory rates and rejected claims that the prior ruling required proof of excessiveness relative to costs.

business & regulatorypropertyprocedure

The case involved a defendant convicted in Michigan circuit court of operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor, in violation of the state motor vehicle code. The defendant appealed on the ground that trial testimony about police advising him of his statutory right to a blood test, combined with the absence of any test results, improperly suggested to the jury that he had refused the test. Under the applicable statute, a defendant must be informed of the right to request a blood test by a physician of his choosing, and evidence of refusal is expressly inadmissible. The Michigan Supreme Court held that the reference to the blood-test advice was tantamount to introducing prohibited evidence of refusal, constituted prejudicial error, and could not be cured by the defendant's subsequent explanatory testimony. The conviction was reversed and the matter remanded for further proceedings.

criminal lawprocedure