From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Pitsch v. Blandford

Supreme Court of Michigan
Oct 7, 2005
474 Mich. 879 (Mich. 2005)

Opinion

No. 127057.

October 7, 2005.


Summary Dispositions.

SC: 127057.

Pursuant to MCR 7.302(G)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals, reinstate plaintiff's cause of action, and remand this case to the Kent Circuit Court for further proceedings. Inasmuch as defendant could have waived his statute of limitations affirmative defense, MCR 2.111(F)(3), it does not appear to offend any established public policy for defendant to take a less drastic step of tolling a period of limitations by agreement. See Rory v. Continental Ins Co, 473 Mich 457, 470-471 (2005). The parties' unambiguous agreement to toll the period of limitations is to be enforced as written. The Court of Appeals independent assessment of the "reasonableness" of the parties' tolling agreement was unwarranted. Id. at 470. Because defendant was not entitled to judgment as a matter of law, we also vacate the award of attorney fees. We do not retain jurisdiction. Reported below: 264 Mich App 28.

CAVANAGH, J. I would reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals, reinstate plaintiffs cause of action, and remand this case to the Kent Circuit Court for further proceedings without the further statement found in the majority's order.

KELLY, J. I join the statement of Justice CAVANAGH.


Summaries of

Pitsch v. Blandford

Supreme Court of Michigan
Oct 7, 2005
474 Mich. 879 (Mich. 2005)
Case details for

Pitsch v. Blandford

Case Details

Full title:PITSCH v. BLANDFORD

Court:Supreme Court of Michigan

Date published: Oct 7, 2005

Citations

474 Mich. 879 (Mich. 2005)
704 N.W.2d 695

Citing Cases

Hardin v. Prieskorn

Id. Plaintiff relies on the Supreme Court's decision in Pitsch v Blandford, 474 Mich 879; 704 NW2d 695…