TOWNSHIP OF COLUMBUS V THOMAS MARKEL
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
TOWNSHIP OF COLUMBUS,
UNPUBLISHED
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v
THOMAS MARKEL and CATHERINE MARKEL,
No. 182853
St. Clair Circuit Court
LC No. 80-611267-CZ
Defendants-Appellants.
Before: Holbrook, Jr., P.J., and White and A. T. Davis*, JJ.
WHITE, J. (concurring in part and dissenting in part).
I concur in the portion of the majority’s opinion that vacates the penalty assessment. I
respectfully dissent from the portion of the majority’s opinion that vacates the circuit court’s finding of
contempt, and vacates the award of attorney fees to plaintiff. Because the record reflects that the
successor judge was adequately familiar with the proceedings that preceded the January 17, 1995
hearing; the parties had requested that the record of the evidentiary hearing on contempt held before the
retiring judge be preserved; and the record does not reflect that defense counsel expressly sought to
continue the show cause hearing before the successor judge,1 I conclude that the successor judge’s
finding of contempt need not be vacated.
I would affirm the finding of contempt and the award of attorney fees, and grant plaintiff an
opportunity to establish any actual losses, in addition to attorney fees, sustained as a direct result of
defendants’ contempt.
/s/ Helene N. White
* Circuit judge, sitting on the Court of Appeals by assignment.
-1
1
Rather than seek a continuation of the show-cause hearing, defendants filed a motion to extend time
and objections to plaintiff’s proposed order.
-2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
