ESTATE OF KINGDON GRANDISON JR V HENRY FORD HOSP
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
KAREN GRANDISON, Personal Representative
of the Estate of KINGDON GRANDISON, JR.,
Deceased,
UNPUBLISHED
April 1, 2004
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v
No. 243087
Wayne Circuit Court
LC No. 00-011117-NH
HENRY FORD HOSPITAL,
Defendant-Appellee.
Before: Zahra, P.J., and Saad and Schuette, JJ.
MEMORANDUM.
Plaintiff appeals as of right from a circuit court order distributing settlement proceeds in
this wrongful death action. We affirm. This appeal is being decided without oral argument
pursuant to MCR 7.214(E).
The surviving spouse, children, and other relations of a decedent are entitled to recover
damages in an amount the court “considers fair and equitable considering the relative damages
sustained by each” person. MCL 600.2922(3)(a), (6)(d). We review the trial court’s factual
findings for clear error but review its distribution of the proceeds, based on its findings, for an
abuse of discretion. Hoogewerf v Kovach, 185 Mich App 577, 579; 463 NW2d 160 (1990).
Plaintiff first contends that the trial court erred in considering a social worker’s report
which contained the deceased’s statements about his marriage because it constituted inadmissible
hearsay. Plaintiff did not object to the evidence below and thus the issue has not been preserved
for appeal. In re Weiss, 227 Mich App 37, 39; 568 NW2d 336 (1997). Because plaintiff has
failed to brief the merits of the issue, it is deemed abandoned. FMB-First Michigan Bank v
Bailey, 232 Mich App 711, 717; 591 NW2d 676 (1998). “An appellant may not merely
announce his position and leave it to this Court to discover and rationalize the basis for his
claims.” Green Oak Twp v Munzel, 255 Mich App 235, 244; 661 NW2d 243 (2003).
Plaintiff next contends that the trial court erred in considering the length of the parties’
relationships with the decedent rather than the quality of their relationships. Both quantity and
quality are appropriately considered in determining the type of relationship shared by the
claimant and the deceased. In re Claim of Carr, 189 Mich App 234, 239; 471 NW2d 637 (1991).
-1-
A review of the record shows that the trial court considered both and, in light of the scant
evidence presented by the parties, we find no error in the court’s findings or distribution.
Plaintiff also asserts that the court erred in taking into consideration her prospects of
remarrying and that it demonstrated bias in doing so. Plaintiff has not cited any authority in
support of her claim and thus it is deemed abandoned. Central Cartage Co v Fewless, 232 Mich
App 517, 529; 591 NW2d 422 (1998).
Affirmed.
/s/ Brian K. Zahra
/s/ Henry William Saad
/s/ Bill Schuette
-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.
