LARRY BANE V PLYMOUTH CANTON COMMUNITY CRIER INC
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
LARRY BANE, JOHN E. THOMAS, and
THOMAS M. PROSE,
UNPUBLISHED
January 25, 2002
Plaintiffs/Counter-DefendantsAppellants,
v
PLYMOUTH CANTON COMMUNITY CRIER,
INC.,
No. 224381
Wayne Circuit Court
LC No. 98-836594-CZ
Defendant-Appellee.
Before: Saad, P.J., and Bandstra, C.J., and Whitbeck, J.
PER CURIAM.
Plaintiffs appeal as of right the trial court’s orders valuing plaintiffs’ stock at one dollar
and dismissing this action on defendant’s motion for summary disposition. We dismiss the
appeal as moot.
Plaintiffs’ complaint sought an injunction to prevent defendant from consummating a
proposed sale or merger until such time as plaintiffs had a reasonable opportunity to exercise
their dissenter’s rights. The complaint also sought damages allegedly incurred as a result of
defendant’s exclusion of plaintiffs from meetings, votes, and document distributions related to
the proposed transaction. Since the filing of plaintiffs’ complaint, however, the proposed merger
or sale has fallen through, defendant has filed for bankruptcy, and one of the plaintiffs has
purchased the entirety of defendant’s assets.
As a general rule, an appellate court will not decide moot issues. East Grand Rapids
School Dist v Kent Co Tax Allocation Bd, 415 Mich 381, 390; 330 NW2d 7 (1982). An issue is
deemed moot when an event occurs that renders it impossible for a reviewing court to grant
relief. Jackson v Thompson-McCully Co, LLC, 239 Mich App 482, 493; 608 NW2d 531 (2000);
Tauriainen v Secretary of State, 69 Mich App 318, 320; 244 NW2d 462 (1976). Here, as a result
of the merger’s failure, there is nothing left to enjoin and plaintiffs have suffered no damages.
-1-
Accordingly, there is no meaningful relief this Court can provide and the appeal should
consequently be dismissed.1
We dismiss as moot.
/s/ Henry William Saad
/s/ Richard A. Bandstra
/s/ William C. Whitbeck
1
In reaching this conclusion we reject plaintiffs’ assertion that the appeal is not moot because
there remains a legal controversy regarding whether defendant’s redemption of plaintiffs’ shares
was precluded by statute. That issue was recently decided by this Court in Bane v Chorkey,
unpublished opinion per curiam of the Court of Appeals, issued January ___, 2002 (Docket No.
224378).
-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.
