Court Opinion

ID: 9504701
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-06 19:57:32.704236+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:04:06.374702
License: Public Domain

Kelly, J.
(dissenting). I believe that the judge’s statements on the record make clear that he intended plaintiff’s appellate rights respecting count iv be preserved in the final order. It is obvious to me, also, that both the judge and plaintiff reasonably relied on the *558interpretation of MCR 2.403(M)(1) made by Reddam1 and its progeny. Therefore, it is uryust to apply a more strict reading of the court rule to this plaintiffs appeal. I would remand to the Court of Appeals for review of the summary disposition ruling on its merits.

 Reddam v Consumers Mortgage Corp, 182 Mich App 754; 452 NW2d 908 (1990).