Case ID: nw2d_912/html/0175-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

IN RE RHEA BRODY LIVING TRUST, dated January 17, 1978, as amended.
    Robert Brody, Intervenor-Appellant, v. Cathy B. Deutchman, Petitioner-Appellee, and Michael Barton, Special Fiduciary, Intervenor, and Jay Brody, Intervenor-Appellant.
    SC: 156670 COA: 330871
    Supreme Court of Michigan.
    June 8, 2018
    Order
   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.