Mathew Dunaskiss v. Varadee Dunaskis, 331303

Siblings Mathew Dunaskiss (plaintiff) and Varadee Dunaskis (defendant) were beneficiaries of multiple estates; six Oakland County parcels were jointly owned (each sibling 25%, estate 50%).
On October 31, 2014, they executed a Memorandum of Understanding to resolve estate disputes: Mathew would pay Varadee $1,000,000 in specified installments in exchange for her waiver/release and transfer of her interests in the estates and parcels.
Payment terms in the Memorandum: $100,000 upfront (paid), $100,000 on closure of each probate estate (later modified by addendum), then $50,000 every six months beginning six months after final estate closure, with 3% annual interest; Mathew could substitute transfer of certain Lake Orion properties for the installment obligation.
Parties signed an addendum requiring Mathew to pay Varadee $200,000 by Nov 17, 2014 (paid), altering the scheduled $300,000 estate-closure payments to $200,000 plus the initial $100,000 (total $300,000 paid). The estates closed.
Mathew tendered the remaining balance (he contended $700,000 principal plus ~$21,000 interest) but Varadee refused to execute quitclaim deeds; Mathew sued for breach of contract and to quiet title.
Trial court first denied summary disposition without prejudice citing ambiguity about timing of deed transfer, but later granted Mathew summary disposition and quieted title after Mathew offered full payment and Varadee still refused.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the Memorandum required Varadee to transfer title before full payment or whether full payment was a condition precedent to her transfer	Mathew argued he could tender the full remaining amount (accelerate) and thereby compel transfer; he presented a certified check for full balance plus interest	Varadee argued the contract required installment payments ($50,000 every six months with 3% annual interest) and contained no acceleration clause; she would not transfer until she received all payments or opted for a Lake Orion property	Court held the Memorandum made plaintiff’s payment obligation a condition precedent to Varadee’s duty to relinquish title; but nothing barred plaintiff from tendering the entire remaining amount, so Varadee’s refusal to accept full payment and transfer was a breach; title was quieted to Mathew

Maiden v. Rozwood, 461 Mich. 109 (standards for summary disposition review)
Cuddington v. United Health Servs., Inc., 298 Mich. App. 264 (treating MCR 2.116(C)(10) motions when court considers evidence outside pleadings)
Burkhardt v. Bailey, 260 Mich. App. 636 (contract interpretation reviewed de novo; equitable actions reviewed de novo)
Ajax Paving Indus., Inc. v. Vanopdenbosch Const. Co., 289 Mich. App. 639 (contracts interpreted by their plain and ordinary meaning)
Zurich Ins. Co. v. CCR & Co., 226 Mich. App. 599 (extrinsic evidence not permitted to change unambiguous contract terms; parol evidence rule for ambiguous terms)
Archambo v. Lawyers Title Ins. Corp., 466 Mich. 402 (definition and role of condition precedent)