LaFave v. Ionia County Road Commission Chairperson , 498 Mich. 967 ( 2016 )

Order Michigan Supreme Court
Lansing, Michigan
January 27, 2016 Robert P. Young, Jr.,
Chief Justice
151417 Stephen J. Markman
Brian K. Zahra
Bridget M. McCormack
David F. Viviano
RENEE B. LAFAVE, SHIRLEY ZIMMER, Richard H. Bernstein
RONALD PROCTOR, and JOANN M. Joan L. Larsen,
PROCTOR, Justices
Plaintiffs/Counter-Defendants-
Appellees,
and
LAWRENCE R. MCCALEB,
Plaintiff,
v SC: 151417
COA: 315439
Ionia CC: 2010-027799-CH
IONIA COUNTY ROAD COMMISSION
CHAIRPERSON, JOHN BUSH, STATE
TREASURER, CHARLES LLOYD BABCOCK,
DAWN KONENSKI, ROGER KONENSKI,
LEON PLATTE TRUST, ALICIA BETZ,
MEDFORD BAILEY, ROBERT ZIMMER,
TRACY ANTHONY, DANIEL R. ZIMMER,
JODIE L. ZIMMER, DAWN ALDRICH,
PATRICIA LIPPINCOTT TRUST, JOHANNA
PARSHALL, MICHELLE DROSTE, EUGENE
DROSTE, DIRECTOR OF DEPARTMENT OF
NATURAL RESOURCES, CONSUMERS
ENERGY CO., AT&T, HOMEWORKS
TRI-COUNTY ELECTRIC CO-OP, TOWNSHIP
OF LYONS, IONIA COUNTY ROAD
COMMISSION, and DIRECTOR OF
DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND
REGULATORY AFFAIRS
Defendants,
and
SALLY N. COOK,
Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff,
and
MOLLY E. KANDLE-KOST and JAMES KOST,
Defendants/Counter-Plaintiffs-
Appellants.
___________________________________________/
2
On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the January 27, 2015
judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.305(H)(1), in
lieu of granting leave to appeal, we VACATE that part of the Court of Appeals opinion
applying the law of abandonment to the facts of this case. The Court of Appeals erred by
finding that the facts on record are sufficient to demonstrate defendants Molly Kandle-
Kost and James Kost intended to abandon their easement rights in Weberta Drive,
particularly in light of the failure of the trial court to make any findings on abandonment
or the precise nature of defendants’ property right. We therefore REMAND this case to
the Ionia Circuit Court for findings on the nature of any property right retained by
defendants Molly Kandle-Kost and James Kost in Weberta Drive. Once that court has
determined the nature of that right, it should determine whether an abandonment analysis
is applicable and, if it is applicable, make any necessary findings regarding whether
defendants intended to abandon their property rights in Weberta Drive. See Dep’t of
Natural Resources v Carmody-Lahti Real Estate, Inc, 472 Mich. 359, 385 (2005). In all
other respects, leave to appeal is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the
remaining question presented should be reviewed by this Court.
We do not retain jurisdiction.
I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the
foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.
January 27, 2016
a0120
Clerk