HEINRICH SCHORSCH V ARMAND VELARDO
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
HEINRICH SCHORSCH,
UNPUBLISHED
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v
No. 187982
Oakland Circuit Court
LC No. 94-486998-NM
ARMAND VELARDO and ARMAND
VELARDO, P.C.,
Defendants-Appellees.
Before: Bandstra, P.J., and Griffin and Fitzgerald, JJ.
FITZGERALD, J. (dissenting.)
I respectfully disagree with the majority’s conclusion that plaintiff’s three to five attempts to
serve defendants did not constitute a diligent effort to serve defendants. The attempts to serve
defendants began eight days before the expiration of the original summons. In light of the fact that
service was successful in the unrelated case, plaintiffs had no reason to believe that defendants would be
unavailable or that service would not be successfully effected before the original summons expired.
Under the totality of the circumstances, I would hold that plaintiff established good cause for not serving
the original summons within the ninety-one day period and would reverse the trial court’s dismissal of
the case.
/s/ E. Thomas Fitzgerald
-1
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.
