Categories: Michigan Supreme Court Opinions

SOUTHFIELD JEEP v. PREFERRED AUTO, 477 Mich. 1061 (2007)

728 N.W.2d 459

SOUTHFIELD JEEP, INC., d/b/a SOUTHFIELD CHRYSLER-PLYMOUTH-JEEP, Plaintiff/Counter Defendant-Appellee, v. PREFERRED AUTO SALES, INC., and MARK ARMENI, Defendants/Counter Plaintiffs-Appellants.

No. 131822.Supreme Court of Michigan.
March 28, 2007.

Appeal from the Court of Appeals No. 256014.

Summary Dispositions March 28, 2007.

Pursuant to MCR 7.302(G)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we reverse in part the judgment of the Court of Appeals. The Court of Appeals erred in finding that the defendant’s failure to appeal the district court’s denial of its motion to transfer the case to the circuit court leads to the conclusion that defendant either acquiesced in the district court’s decision that the damages did not exceed the jurisdictional limit, or chose to forfeit any amount in excess of the jurisdictional limit of the district court. Slip op, p 7. Because the district court’s denial of the defendant’s motion was interlocutory, the defendant may appeal that decision as of right, on entry of a final order by the district court disposing of the case. See People v Torres, 452 Mich 43, 59 (1996) (“[A] party in a civil action may raise previous interlocutory decisions when it brings an appeal of right from a final order.”); subchapter 7.100 of the Michigan Court Rules. In all other respects, leave to appeal is denied, because we are not persuaded that the question presented should now be reviewed by this Court.

jdjungle