New Products Corporation v. Harbor Shores Bhbt Land Development
308 Mich. App. 638
Mich. Ct. App.2014Background
- Disputed parcel lies south of relocated Paw Paw River, with historical chain of ownership from McDorman family to New Products and Harbor Shores entities.
- New Products alleged ownership and sought injunction, quiet title, and declaratory relief, plus a jury on all issues.
- Trial court granted motion to limit issues to jury only for trespass; other claims deemed equitable to be decided by the court.
- MCL 600.2932 provides a statutory action to determine interests in land; the statute designates these actions as equitable in nature.
- Court examined whether the MCL 600.2932 action preserves a jury right under the pre-merger law vs. equity precedent.
- Court concluded most non-trespass claims pleaded under MCL 600.2932 must be decided in equity, not by a jury.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Right to jury trial post-merger under 1963 constitution | New Products: jury must decide claims sounding like ejectment. | MCL 600.2932 actions are equitable; jury not required. | Equity governs non-trespass claims; jury for trespass only. |
| Application of MCL 600.2932 to determine interests in land | Statutory action preserves jury rights for land interests. | Statute creates equitable action to determine land interests. | Legislature intended equity; court must decide under 600.2932 except ejectment-like claims. |
Key Cases Cited
- Madugula v Taub, 496 Mich 685; 853 NW2d 75 (Mich. 2014) (preserves jury right for pre-constitutional actions; equity vs. law distinction.)
- Anzaldua v Band, 216 Mich App 561; 550 NW2d 544 (Mich. Ct. App. 1996) (shall remain language preserves historic jury rights.)
- Brown v Eckel, 259 Mich 551; 244 NW 160 (Mich. 1932) (ejectment involves rights to possession and title; historical law/ownership disputes.)
- Hendershott v Moore, 188 Mich 364; 154 NW 17 (Mich. 1915) (trespass as a right of action at law; injunctions are equitable.)
- Lundberg v Wolbrink, 331 Mich 596; 50 NW2d 168 (Mich. 1951) (equitable doctrines may affect title and possession.)