National filed an amended motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, motion for summary judgment, asserting that Claimant did not commence a proceeding to enforce her claim against National within 90 days of her claim being rejected, pursuant to Michigan corporate dissolution statutes. The trial court granted the summary judgment motion, entered judgment in favor of National and against Claimant, and dismissed her petition with prejudice. Claimant timely filed her appeal. We review the granting of summary judgment in a light most favorable to the non-movant. ITT Commercial Fin.
Summary judgment is an issue of law and as such, our review is de novo.
The criteria on appeal for testing the propriety of summary judgment is no different from that employed by the trial court to determine the propriety of sustaining the motion initially. The burden on the proponent of summary judgment is to show a right to judgment flowing from facts about which there is no genuine dispute. We address Claimant's first and second points on appeal together as they both concern whether National has complied with the Michigan corporate dissolution statutes. Claimant's first point on appeal challenges the granting of summary judgment in that there was a genuine issue of material fact as to whether she received a rejection of claim notice as required by Michigan statute. Her second point questions whether National's answer to her lawsuit's petition constituted a proper rejection under Michigan corporate dissolution law.