Court Opinion

ID: 9676341
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 05:22:23.897637+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:16:47.855914
License: Public Domain

Michael J. Kelly, P.J.
(concurring). I concur in the result because no abuse of discretion is alleged. The Supreme Court has granted leave in People v Evans, 168 Mich App 654; 425 NW2d 209 (1988), lv gtd 431 Mich 870 (1988), and presumably will give guidance on which statute applies. Since this case involves a judgment entered more than two years previously, I would think the application for relief in the trial court should have been addressed through MCR 2.612(C)(1)(f). Since the Supreme Court will resolve the split on our Court, my view as to whether MCL 765.15; MSA 28.902 applies is superfluous. Defendant-appellant county is encouraged to seek review in the Supreme Court if it wishes to amplify on the issues to be treated in People v Evans, supra.