in Re Cliffman Estate
151998
| Mich. | Apr 17, 2017Background
- Gordon Cliffman married Betty Carter in 1976; Betty had six children from a prior marriage (Cliffman never adopted them). Betty died in 1996; Cliffman died from injuries sustained in a 2012 automobile accident and died intestate.
- Cliffman’s personal representative (one of Betty’s sons) settled wrongful-death/underinsured motorist claims for a gross $300,000; after attorney fees and allocation for conscious pain-and-suffering, $160,000 remained for distribution under the Wrongful Death Act (WDA).
- Cliffman’s four stepsons (Betty’s surviving children) claimed a share under MCL 600.2922(3)(b) as “the children of the deceased’s spouse.” Cliffman’s sisters objected; the probate court denied the stepsons’ claim.
- The Michigan Court of Appeals affirmed, relying on In re Combs Estate, holding that “spouse” meant a person who is married at the time of death (so a predeceased spouse’s children cannot recover).
- The Michigan Supreme Court denied leave to appeal by order, but Justice Young (joined by Chief Justice Markman and Justice Viviano) dissented, explaining why he would reverse and hold stepchildren of a predeceased spouse eligible to share in WDA proceeds.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether “children of the deceased’s spouse” in MCL 600.2922(3)(b) includes children of a spouse who predeceased the decedent | Stepsons: “spouse” should be read in plain meaning (including a spouse who predeceased the decedent for WDA purposes); therefore Betty’s children qualify | Opposing parties: “spouse” means a currently married person; death terminates the marriage, so a predeceased spouse’s children are not “children of the deceased’s spouse” | Justice Young (dissent): would hold the phrase includes children of a predeceased spouse and would remand for proof of damages; Supreme Court (majority) denied leave so lower-court judgment stands |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Combs Estate, 257 Mich App 622 (Mich. Ct. App. 2003) (court of appeals decision holding stepchildren of a predeceased spouse do not qualify under the WDA)
- In re Certified Question from the United States Dist. Court for the Western Dist. of Mich., 493 Mich 70 (Mich. 2012) (interpreting a different statutory term—“married woman”—distinguishable from WDA language)
- Hecht v. Nat’l Heritage Academies, Inc., 499 Mich 586 (Mich. 2016) (statutory-construction principles; use of dictionaries to determine plain meaning)
- Sun Valley Foods Co. v. Ward, 460 Mich 230 (Mich. 1999) (statutory provisions must be read together to discern legislative intent)