JAMES A NORVELL V JO ANN HACKETT

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS JAMES A. NORVELL, UNPUBLISHED February 11, 2000 Plaintiff-Appellant, v JO ANN HACKETT and JUANITA HUSEMAN, No. 208769 Wayne Circuit Court LC No. 97-718913-CH Defendants-Appellees. Before: O’Connell, P.J., and Meter and T. G. Hicks*, JJ. MEMORANDUM. Plaintiff appeals as of right from the trial court’s order granting defendants’ motion for summary disposition and dismissing the case. We affirm. The parties, who are siblings, own a parcel of property as joint tenants with full rights of survivorship. Plaintiff filed a complaint seeking sale of the property in lieu of partition. Defendants moved for summary disposition pursuant to MCR 2.116(C)(8), arguing that property owned by parties as joint tenants with full rights of survivorship could not be the subject of a partition action. The trial court granted the motion. We review the trial court’s decision on a motion for summary disposition pursuant to MCR 2.116(C)(8) de novo. Beaty v Hertzberg & Golden, PC, 456 Mich 247, 253; 571 NW2d 716 (1997). Summary disposition is proper where the claim is so clearly unenforceable as a matter of law that no factual development could possible justify recovery. Simko v Blake, 448 Mich 648, 654; NW2d 842 (1995). We conclude that the trial court properly granted summary disposition in this case. Parties who hold property as joint tenants with full rights of survivorship hold joint life estates with contingent remainders. Albro v Allen, 434 Mich 271, 275; 454 NW2d 85 (1990). The contingent remainders cannot be destroyed by any act of a co-tenant. Id. at 279. Although the life estate may be partitioned, this does not affect the contingent remainders. Id. at 282. The contingent remainders are not subject to partition. Id. at 284. * Circuit judge, sitting on the Court of Appeals by assignment. -1­ Plaintiff argues that the trial court erred by granting defendants’ motion for summary disposition because Albro specifically overruled earlier cases that held that a joint tenancy with full rights of survivorship cannot be partitioned. While Albro did overrule those previous cases, it reaffirmed the rule that the contingent remainders are indestructible and not subject to partition. At most, plaintiff would be entitled to convey only his life estate in the joint tenancy. Id. at 287. However, such a conveyance would not affect defendants’ rights of survivorship. Id. The trial court correctly concluded that plaintiff’s complaint seeking sale of the property in lieu of partition failed to state a claim on which relief could be granted. Affirmed. /s/ Peter D. O’Connell /s/ Patrick M. Meter /s/ Timothy G. Hicks -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.