Opinion
SC: 152655 COA: 319023
07-07-2017
IN RE MARDIGIAN ESTATE Mark S. Papazian, Executor for the Estate of Robert Douglas Mardigian, Appellee, v. Melissa Goldberg, Susan V. Lucken, Nancy Varbedian, Edward Mardigian, Grant Mardigian, and Matthew Mardigian, Appellants, and JP Morgan Chase Bank, NA, Appellee.
Order
On January 10, 2017, the Court heard oral argument on the application for leave to appeal the October 8, 2015 judgment of the Court of Appeals. On order of the Court, the application is again considered, and it is GRANTED. The parties shall include among the issues to be briefed: (1) whether the rebuttable presumption of undue influence set forth in In re Powers Estate , 375 Mich. 150 (1965), when used as a means to determine the testator's intent, is a workable rule that sufficiently protects the testator when the testator's lawyer violates MRPC 1.8(c) ; (2) whether this Court's adoption of MRPC 1.8(c) warrants overruling In re Powers Estate ; and (3) if In re Powers Estate is overruled, whether a violation of MRPC 1.8(c) should bear on the validity of the gift provided to the testator's lawyer under the testamentary instrument; and if so, how?
The Attorney Grievance Commission, the Probate Section and the Elder Law and Disability Rights Section of the State Bar of Michigan are invited to file briefs amicus curiae. In addition, the State Bar of Michigan, or an appropriate committee of the State Bar authorized in accordance with the State Bar's bylaws, is invited to file a brief amicus curiae. Other persons or groups interested in the determination of the issues presented in this case may move the Court for permission to file briefs amicus curiae.
Wilder, J., did not participate because he was on the Court of Appeals panel.