362990
Mich. Ct. App.Nov 21, 2023Background
- Main Street Lofts Condominium Association (plaintiff) contracted for exterior repairs and funded them through a loan and three special assessments issued between 2012 and 2015; Condominium Management Associates (CMA) managed association affairs.
- Defendant Parodi purchased his unit in 2015; he refused to pay a fourth assessment (announced January 2020) intended to address cash-flow/loan shortfall.
- Plaintiff recorded a lien, sued to collect the unpaid assessment and foreclose (complaint filed October 7, 2021); Parodi counterclaimed (March 18, 2022) for breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, conversion, quiet title, and slander of title and added CMA as third-party defendant.
- Trial court granted summary disposition: (1) dismissed Parodi’s breach/fiduciary/conversion claims as time-barred; (2) granted plaintiff foreclosure and money-damages judgment on the unpaid fourth assessment and awarded attorney fees; (3) dismissed Parodi’s quiet-title and slander-of-title claims as moot.
- Parodi appealed three orders (consolidated); the Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court in all respects and allowed prevailing parties to tax costs.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Parodi’s claims for conversion, breach of contract, and breach of fiduciary duty are time-barred | The claims are barred because Parodi did not plead or produce evidence of wrongful acts within the applicable statutes of limitation | The claims could accrue later or be tolled; discovery (inspection rights) might reveal timely wrongful acts or fraudulent concealment | Affirmed dismissal: claims barred (conversion & fiduciary = 3 years; contract = 6 years); Parodi offered no facts/evidence of acts within limitation periods or MCR 2.116(H) affidavit to justify further discovery |
| Whether summary disposition for plaintiff’s foreclosure and money-damages claim was premature or inappropriate | Plaintiff had documentary proof of the unpaid fourth assessment, lien, and right to foreclose; Parodi failed to raise a genuine factual dispute | Parodi argued the fourth assessment was invalid because earlier-assessment funds were misapplied and further discovery might show that | Affirmed: (C)(10) appropriate — Parodi produced no probative evidence that funds were misappropriated or that discovery would likely produce supporting evidence |
| Whether the trial court erred in awarding attorney fees and whether Parodi preserved the issue | Plaintiff sought fees under statute and bylaws and submitted an attorney-fee affidavit and itemized statement | Parodi objected only after the fact (in objections to the proposed order and motion for reconsideration) and did not contest fees in the motion response | Affirmed: Parodi waived the challenge by failing to preserve it; alternatively fees were authorized by MCL 559.206 and the bylaws and supported by counsel’s affidavit |
| Whether quiet-title and slander-of-title claims should survive after judgment for foreclosure and whether procedural objections to entry of the proposed order required a hearing | Plaintiff argued the foreclosure ruling made these claims impossible to prevail on (moot) and the proposed order reflected the court’s decision | Parodi argued the court erred by entering the proposed order without a hearing and that his title claims should proceed | Affirmed: quiet-title and slander claims were moot because the foreclosure ruling established plaintiff’s valid lien; any failure to hold a settling hearing under MCR 2.602 was harmless because the order matched the court’s decision |
Key Cases Cited
- West v. Gen. Motors Corp., 469 Mich. 177 (2003) (de novo review of summary-disposition rulings)
- Kincaid v. Cardwell, 300 Mich. App. 513 (2013) (standard for (C)(7) statute-of-limitations dismissal with documentary evidence)
- Magee v. DaimlerChrysler Corp., 472 Mich. 108 (2005) (accrual and de novo review principles)
- Aroma Wines & Equip., Inc. v. Columbian Distrib. Servs., Inc., 497 Mich. 337 (2015) (definition and elements of conversion)
- Blazer Foods, Inc. v. Restaurant Props., 259 Mich. App. 241 (2003) (tort limitations accrual when all elements, including damages, can be alleged)
- Prentis Family Foundation v. Karmanos Cancer Inst., 266 Mich. App. 39 (2005) (breach-of-fiduciary accrual when beneficiary knew or should have known)
- Lowrey v. LMPS & LMPJ, Inc., 500 Mich. 1 (2016) (nonmoving party must present documentary evidence to avoid (C)(10) dismissal)
- Marilyn Froling Revocable Living Trust v. Bloomfield Hills Country Club, 283 Mich. App. 264 (2009) (requirements for claiming summary-disposition prematurity and MCR 2.116(H) affidavit)
- Mays v. Snyder, 323 Mich. App. 1 (2018) (fraudulent-concealment tolling under MCL 600.5855 requires pleading and proof of affirmative concealment)
- Special Prop. VI v. Woodruff, 273 Mich. App. 586 (2007) (quiet-title plaintiff must establish prima facie title)