Accordingly, collateral estoppel does not apply here. In this case, the COA notes, only the ownership of Parcel A was litigated, not Parcel B. The COA explains that for collateral estoppel to apply, the prior case must have involved the same parties and the same issues. In their opinion, the COA distinguishes between collateral estoppel and res judicata.
Scrivener error trial#
In the Court of Appeals, the trial court’s order is reversed. Again, the trial court sides with Appellee, and it is from this order that this appeal is filed. But Appellee objects, saying that this new petition is barred by collateral estoppel and res judicata. She asserts: If the scrivener’s error is not valid, then Parcel B should have been in the estate of Matt’s surviving spouse and should pass to her accordingly. Then, Appellant files a new petition seeking the same relief only as to Parcel B. The trial court agrees with Appellee, and the petitions filed by Appellant are denied. Accordingly, Appellee argues, the request for relief, which would have caused title in Parcel A to be deemed to have passed to the beneficiaries of the estate of Matt’s surviving spouse, must be denied, the result of which would be to leave Appellee as the owner of Parcel A, and title to Parcel B uncertain.
In that matter, Appellee refuses to be deposed (for which he is sanctioned), refuses to answer other discovery requests, and does not participate in trial, except to file a brief after the proofs are completed, which brief says that under Michigan law an affidavit of scrivener’s error cannot be used to alter the substantive rights of an owner without that owner also signing off, which he did not do. She offers the scrivener’s affidavit as proof. ĭecades later, Appellant, who has a beneficial interest in the estate of the now deceased surviving spouse of Matt, goes to Court to quiet title to parcel A and amend the Order of Assignment from Matt’s estate to include Parcel A. Ī few more years pass and an Order of Assignment from Matt’s estate conveys the residue to surviving spouse of Matt, but that order does not reference either Parcel A or B. Two years later, the attorney who prepared said deed files an affidavit of scrivener’s error stating that the deed should have said Parcel B not Parcel A. Then Matt died vesting title in Parcel A in Appellee. Matt deeded Parcel A to himself and Appellee as joint tenants with rights of survivorship.
This unpublished opinion explores the differences between res judicata and collateral estoppel, while touching on the limits to using an affidavit of scrivener’s error to clear title to real property.
0 kommentar(er)
