THOMAS VON MEYER V PAXTON PROPERTIES LLC
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
THOMAS VON MEYER,
UNPUBLISHED
July 12, 2002
Plaintiff/Counter-DefendantAppellee,
v
PAXTON PROPERTIES, LLC, PAXTON, INC.,
and PETER PAXTON,
No. 230687
St. Clair Circuit Court
LC No. 99-002014-CH
Defendants/Counter-PlaintiffsAppellants,
and
MICHIGAN NATIONAL BANK, DETROIT
EDISON
COMPANY,
MICHIGAN
BELL
TELEPHONE COMPANY, f/k/a AMERITECH,
and SEMCO ENERGY GAS COMPANY,
Defendants.
Before: Hood, P.J., and Saad and E. M. Thomas*, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
Defendants appeal as of right that portion of the trial court’s judgment awarding treble
damages to plaintiff. We affirm. This appeal is being decided without oral argument pursuant to
MCR 7.214(E).
In 1986 plaintiff purchased a parcel of property that housed a junkyard and a used car lot.
A wooden fence ten feet high and 280 feet long separated plaintiff’s property from the adjacent
lot. The previous owners represented to plaintiff that the fence served as the boundary between
plaintiff’s property and the adjacent property. Plaintiff relied on the representation. In 1998
defendants purchased the adjacent property. A survey showed that plaintiff’s fence was located
on defendants’ property. Defendants used a chain saw to cut down the fence.
* Circuit judge, sitting on the Court of Appeals by assignment.
-1-
Plaintiff filed an action to quiet title, claiming title to the disputed portion of property by
acquiescence. He alleged that defendants trespassed onto the property and ejected him by force,
and sought treble damages pursuant to MCL 600.2918(1).1 The trial court found that plaintiff
gained title to the disputed property by acquiescence.2 In addition, the trial court found that
plaintiff was ejected from the property by force when defendants used a chain saw to cut down
the fence, and awarded plaintiff treble damages totaling $36,000.
An action to quiet title is equitable in nature. We review the trial court’s findings of fact
for clear error, and its conclusions of law de novo. Killips v Mannisto, 244 Mich App 256, 258;
624 NW2d 224 (2001). An issue of statutory interpretation presents a question of law that we
review de novo. McJunkin v Cellasto Plastic Corp, 461 Mich 590, 596; 608 NW2d 57 (2000).
MCL 600.2918(1) provides for the awarding of treble damages to any person who is
ejected from land “in a forcible and unlawful manner.” Defendants argue that the trial court
clearly erred in finding that plaintiff was ejected in such a manner. Defendants emphasize that
the force required to support the awarding of treble damages must not merely be that used
against or on the property. Rather, the force must be used or threatened against a person for the
purpose of expelling the person from the land. Shaw v Hoffman, 25 Mich 162, 168-169 (1872).
We affirm the trial court’s award of treble damages to plaintiff. Plaintiff testified that he
told Peter Paxton to stop cutting down the fence but that Paxton, who was using a chain saw,
refused to do so and began chasing him and trying to knock a camera out of his hand. Plaintiff
stated that he was forced to stand on the sidewalk until the police arrived. This evidence of
threatened force against plaintiff’s person supported the awarding of treble damages. MCL
600.2918(1); Shaw, supra; Killips, supra.
Affirmed.
/s/ Harold Hood
/s/ Henry William Saad
/s/ Edward M. Thomas
1
Plaintiff also named as defendants the bank that held the mortgage on defendants’ property, and
the utilities that held easements on the property that was the subject of the litigation.
2
Defendants do not challenge this portion of the trial court’s decision.
-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.
