Monthly Archives: March 2013

In real estate transactions it should go without saying that if you want the deal to hold up in a court of law, you should put it in writing. This is particularly primarily due to the Michigan “statute of frauds” which holds that any agreement for the sale of an interest in land must be evidenced in someContinue reading “In Re Lemcool Trust – An Unfortunate Example of Why You Need to “Put it in Writing””

Failing to comply with Michigan Statute when foreclosing by advertisement can render the foreclosure void – not merely “voidable”. A 6th Circuit Court of Appeals decision provides a good example to lenders, servicers, and other real estate professionals on why it is important to follow MCL 600.3205’s requirements to hold off foreclosure by advertisement forContinue reading “Banks and Mortgage Servicers: The Dangers of Not Complying With Michigan Foreclosure Law and the difference between “Void” and “Voidable”.”

“Laches” no, I don’t mean Latches.  In a legal sense, “laches” means failing to bring your claim in a timely manner and to the prejudice of the opposing party. A recent Michigan Court of Appeals decision highlights an example of “laches” in the context of real estate disputes and how delaying in bringing a claim inContinue reading ““Laches” in Real Estate Disputes. Its Basically About Fairness.”

The elderly and otherwise vulnerable population are particularly susceptible to exploitation, financial and otherwise. A Proposed House Bill would give Judges the discretion to sentence perpetrators convicted of multiple offenses against vulnerable adults consecutively (back to back) as opposed to concurrently (at the same time).  This would provide Judges with the discretion to give these perpetratorsContinue reading “Proposed Michigan House Bill 4264 Would Allow Consecutive Sentencing for Financial Exploitation of Vulnerable Adults”

 The Fair Debt Collection Practice Act (“FDCPA”) is a consumer protection act that requires that debt collectors treat debtors fairly and prohibits certain methods of debt collection. Russell v Equifax ARS, 74 F3d 30, 33 (2d Cir 1996). Michigan has its own state statute, MCL 339.901 et seq., that mirrors the FDCPA. In the context ofContinue reading “U.S. 6th Circuit: Mortgage Foreclosure is debt collection under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.”