Brody v. Deutchman (In Re Rhea Brody Living Trust)

Michigan Supreme Court

Brody v. Deutchman (In Re Rhea Brody Living Trust)

912 N.W.2d 175, 501 Mich. 1094

CourtMichigan Supreme Court

DecidedJune 8, 2018

DocketSC: 156670; COA: 330871

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 912 N.W.2d 175 (Brody v. Deutchman (In Re Rhea Brody Living Trust)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Michigan Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Brody v. Deutchman (In Re Rhea Brody Living Trust), 912 N.W.2d 175, 501 Mich. 1094 (Mich. 2018).

Pincite

Opinion

On order of the Court, the motions to file a reply brief are GRANTED. The application for leave to appeal the September 12, 2017 judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered. Pursuant to MCR 7.305(H)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we VACATE Section II of the Court of Appeals opinion, and we REMAND this case to the Court of Appeals for reconsideration of its standing analysis. On remand, the Court of Appeals should consider whether the terms "child" and "beneficiary" in MCL 700.1105 are modified by the phrase "and any other person that has a property right in or claim against a trust estate." If so, then the Court of Appeals shall consider whether Cathy Deutchman is an "interested person" under this reading of the statute. The Court of Appeals may also consider the arguments made in this Court by the Probate and Estate Planning Section of the State Bar of Michigan, including that Cathy Deutchman has standing in light of MCR 5.125(C)(33)(g) and MCL 700.7603(2) and is a present (not contingent) beneficiary of the trust. In all other respects, leave to appeal is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the remaining question presented should be reviewed by this Court.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

On order of the Court, the motions to file a reply brief are GRANTED. The application for leave to appeal the September 12, 2017 judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered. Pursuant to MCR 7.305(H)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we VACATE Section II of the Court of Appeals opinion, and we REMAND this case to the Court of Appeals for reconsideration of its standing analysis. On remand, the Court of Appeals should consider whether the terms "child" and "beneficiary" in MCL 700.1105 are modified by the phrase "and any other person that has a property right in or claim against a trust estate." If so, then the Court of Appeals shall consider whether Cathy Deutchman is an "interested person" under this reading of the statute. The Court of Appeals may also consider the arguments made in this Court by the Probate and Estate Planning Section of the State Bar of Michigan, including that Cathy Deutchman has standing in light of MCR 5.125(C)(33)(g) and MCL 700.7603(2) and is a present (not contingent) beneficiary of the trust. In all other respects, leave to appeal is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the remaining question presented should be reviewed by this Court.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

912 N.W.2d 175, 501 Mich. 1094, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brody-v-deutchman-in-re-rhea-brody-living-trust-mich-2018.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack