DAGS LLC V SEAN FITZGERALD (Per Curiam Opinion)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS DAGS, LLC, UNPUBLISHED August 25, 2015 Plaintiff-Appellant, v SCOTT T. BOSGRAAF, Individually and as CoTrustee of the SCOTT T. BOSGRAAF TRUST, SEAN FITZGERALD, SARA E. D. FAZIO, RYAN R. MCNALLY, KRIES, ENDERLE, HUDGINS & BORSOS, P.C., JENNIFER M. TICHELAAR, BYRON GALLAGHER, JR., and the GALLAGHER LAW FIRM, PLC, No. 320965 Ottawa Circuit Court LC No. 12-002810-CZ Defendants, and NORM KELLOGG and FIRST FINANCIAL BANK, N.A., Defendants-Appellees. DAGS, LLC, as assignee of AUTO SPORTS UNLIMITED, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v No. 320972 Ottawa Circuit Court LC No. 13-003320-CZ FIRST FINANCIAL BANK, N.A. and NORM KELLOGG, Defendants-Appellees. Before: TALBOT, P.J., and KELLY and SERVITTO, JJ. PER CURIAM. -1- In these consolidated appeals, DAGS, Inc. appeals as of right an order of the trial court granting summary disposition with regard to its claims raised in two separate complaints. We affirm. After Scott T. Bosgraff, his wife Suzanne L. Bosgraaf, and their various businesses (collectively, “the Bosgraafs”) defaulted on loans held by First Financial Bank, N.A. (“First Financial”), First Financial asserted first-priority interests in real estate located at 200 N. Franklin in Zeeland (the “Franklin Property”) and the assets of Auto Sports Unlimited, Inc. (“ASU”). Three separate lawsuits were filed, all of which contested which of the Bosgraafs’ creditors was entitled to the senior priority interest in these two assets, among others. In these three suits, the trial court determined that First Financial held the senior priority interest in these assets. On appeal, this Court affirmed the trial court’s opinion. First Financial Bank, NA v Bosgraaf, unpublished opinion per curiam of the Court of Appeals, issued August 11, 2015 (Docket No.’s 320881 and 321004); Huntington National Bank v Auto Sports Unlimited, Inc, unpublished opinion per curiam of the Court of Appeals, issued August 18, 2015 (Docket No. 320905). DAGS, LLC (“DAGS”), as assignee of ASU, Scott T. Bosgraaf, and the Scott T. Bosgraaf trust, filed two additional lawsuits. Both lawsuits alleged that First Financial, its vicepresident, Norm Kellogg, and various attorneys and their firms interfered with business relationships and contracts when First Financial attempted to enforce its security interests.1 All of these claims were based on a belief that First Financial did not hold a senior interest in the assets it held. After it determined that First Financial did hold the senior interest in these assets, the trial court granted summary disposition with regard to the claims raised by DAGS. DAGS now appeals from this decision. The first five issues raised by DAGS, each of which contests the trial court’s priority decisions, are identical to those raised by the Bosgraafs in First Financial Bank, NA and Huntington National Bank, supra. In First Financial Bank, NA, this Court found that these contentions of error were without merit, and affirmed the trial court’s conclusion that First Financial did hold the senior interest with regard to the Franklin Property and ASU assets. For the same reasons as discussed in First Financial Bank, NA, we find no errors requiring reversal arising out of these five issues. The final issue raised in the instant appeal is also controlled by this Court’s prior decision. This issue contests whether the trial court correctly granted summary disposition with regard to the claims raised by DAGS in its complaints. The only argument put forth by DAGS is that because it believes the trial court’s priority determinations were incorrect, the trial court erred by granting summary disposition with regard to these claims. DAGS acknowledges that if the trial court correctly found that First Financial held the senior interest in these assets, “it logically follows that the [t]rial [c]ourt would grant summary disposition in favor of [d]efendants” with regard to the claims raised by DAGS. As this Court has already determined 1 The claims asserted were multiple counts of tortious interference, conversion, and counts alleging an abuse of the civil process. -2- that First Financial held the senior interest in the Franklin Property and ASU assets, we find no error requiring reversal in the instant appeal. Affirmed. /s/ Michael J. Talbot /s/ Kirsten Frank Kelly /s/ Deborah A. Servitto -3-
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.
