|
No. 136423
| Joan B. Jackson, |
|
Laurie S. Longo |
Plaintiff-Appellee, |
|
|
| v |
(Appeal from Ct of Appeals) |
|
|
(Charlevoix - Pajtas, R.) |
|
|
| Estate of Ronald B. Green, |
|
Bridget Brown Powers |
Defendant-Appellant. |
|
|
| __________________________________________ |
|
|
Click to view briefs in Adobe format:
Plaintiff-Appellee's Brief on Appeal>>
Defendant-Appellant's Brief on Appeal>>
Background
Ronald Green did construction work, farm chores and odd jobs for Joan Jackson over a period of several years. During that time, Jackson gave Green checks totaling more than $50,000. She also caused his name to be placed with hers on deeds for two parcels of real estate, making them joint tenants. (Joint tenancy is established when each property owner receives title at the same time, on the same deed or other title document, and has an equal share of the property and an identical right of possession. If one joint tenant dies, the other tenant has the right of survivorship and succeeds to the dead tenant’s interest in the property.) Jackson said that she put Green’s name on the deeds under the mistaken impression that she needed two signatures on the deeds to avoid legal difficulties, and that she believed that Green would take his name off the deeds any time that she asked him to do so. She also claimed that she wrote the checks to Green because Green had asked to borrow money from her, and that although Green never said he would pay the money back, she believed that he would repay her when he could. When Jackson asked Green to remove his name from the deeds and he refused, Jackson sued Green. Her complaint included a partition action, in which she asked the court to remove Green’s name from the deeds. She also asked the court to enforce her loan claim against Green. The trial court dismissed Jackson’s claims regarding the real estate, finding that neither Jackson’s belief that she needed two signatures on the deeds, nor her belief that Green would remove his name when she asked him to, had any legal significance. As for the checks Jackson wrote to Green, the trial court ruled that whether the checks were loans, gifts, or payment for Green’s work for Jackson was a factual issue for the jury. In so ruling, the trial judge noted that if Jackson’s checks were loans to Green that were payable on demand, the statute of limitations would not begin to run on Jackson’s claim until she demanded payment. A jury found that the checks had been loans and that Green was liable to Jackson for $51,383. Jackson appealed the judgment regarding her real estate claims; Green appealed the judgment regarding the purported loans. While the appeal was pending in the Court of Appeals, Green died, and his estate was substituted as party-plaintiff in the partition action. The Court of Appeals ruled, in an unpublished per curiam opinion, that any rights to the real estate at issue held by Green had reverted to Jackson when Green died. The Court of Appeals affirmed regarding the purported loans. It rejected the Green estate’s argument that the statute of limitations barred Jackson’s claims, reasoning that (assuming that the checks wereloans) Jackson’s cause of action did not accrue until she demanded payment. Green’s estate appeals.
Top of Page
|
