851 N.W.2d 585
Mich. Ct. App.2014Background
- Magdich & Associates sued Novi Development over a lease-space dispute and asserted a right of first refusal; the case was narrowed to Crawford-space issues by stipulation.
- Case evaluation was conducted November 21, 2012; both parties accepted the award without qualification and paid the awarded amount.
- After acceptance, the trial court granted partial amendment to the counterclaim and denied a motion to dismiss the case with prejudice under MCR 2.403(M).
- Plaintiff moved for dismissal with prejudice under MCR 2.403(M), arguing all claims were resolved by the case evaluation.
- Defendant opposed, arguing not all claims were submitted to case evaluation and seeking a new scheduling order for remaining claims.
- The Court of Appeals ultimately reversed the denial, holding that acceptance of a case evaluation ends the entire action and requires dismissal with prejudice.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does acceptance of a case evaluation require dismissal of all claims with prejudice? | Magdich argues all claims are resolved upon acceptance and payment. | Novi contends some claims may remain unsettled and not encompassed by the evaluation. | Yes; all claims must be dismissed on acceptance. |
| Does CAM Constr control over bifurcation and require dismissal in its entirety when both parties accept? | CAM Constr permits partial dismissal if only some claims were evaluated. | CAM Constr allows bifurcation under the facts presented and permits partial disposition. | CAM Constr requires dismissal of the entire action when all parties accept. |
| Did the trial court err in denying the motion to dismiss with prejudice and should this court remand for dismissal with prejudice? | The rule mandates dismissal with prejudice upon acceptance. | The court should not dismiss based on remaining issues not submitted to evaluation. | Yes; reversed and remanded for entry of dismissal with prejudice. |
Key Cases Cited
- CAM Constr v Lake Edgewood Condo Ass’n, 465 Mich 549 (2002) (case evaluation disposes of all claims; no bifurcation)
- Haliw v Sterling Hts, 471 Mich 700 (2005) (plain-language interpretation of court rules; governs division of claims)
- Larson v Auto-Owners Ins Co, 194 Mich App 329 (1992) (case evaluation expedites final settlement; final adjudication binds parties)
- Reddam v Consumer Mortgage Corp, 182 Mich App 754 (1990) (rejected as contrary to the rule's unambiguous language)