Court Opinion

ID: 9687133
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 16:16:38.387475+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:18:24.446112
License: Public Domain

Griffin, P.J.
(concurring in part and dissenting in part). I agree with the disposition of the issues raised and preserved in this consolidated appeal. I join with the majority in reversing the Washtenaw Circuit Court order transferring venue to the Wayne Circuit Court and in affirming the Wayne Circuit Court order refusing the transfer.
I dissent from the majority’s decision to revisit sua sponte the June 8, 1990, Wayne Circuit Court order transferring venue to the Washtenaw Circuit Court. As noted by the majority, plaintiffs application for leave to appeal was denied by this Court on August 20, 1990 (Shepherd, P.J., dissenting). No further appeals were taken by plaintiff regarding the 1990 order.
In this consolidated case, neither party has appealed the 1990 transfer order from the Wayne Circuit Court to the Washtenaw Circuit Court. The limited leave to appeal granted by our Court does not include the 1990 order.
I disagree that MCR 7.216(A)(7) should be utilized in this case to address an issue that is not before us. Michigan’s venue provisions are nonjurisdictional. MCL 600.1601; MSA 27A.1601. Accordingly, improper venue does not affect an otherwise valid judgment. MCL 600.1645; MSA 27A.1645, and In re Forfeiture of $1,159,420, 194 Mich App 134, 140-141; 486 NW2d 326 (1992). Because the parties can receive a fair and convenient trial in either the Washtenaw Circuit Court or the Wayne Circuit Court, I would not prolong the venue limbo.