GEORGE PROSSER V CONSUMERS POWER CO
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
GEORGE PROSSER,
UNPUBLISHED
Plaintiff,
and
CLIFFORD J. ABBEL, DANIEL ACKER,
WALTER ADAMS, CHARLES DOUGLAS
ALLEN, and HOWARD ANDERSON,
Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v
No. 174221
LC No. 93-67025 CZ
CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY,
Defendant-Appellee.
Before: Michael J. Kelly, P.J., and O’Connell and K.W. Schmidt,* JJ.
O’CONNELL, J. (dissenting).
I respectfully dissent.
The first sentence of MCR 2.207 reads as follows: “Misjoinder of parties is not a ground for
dismissal of an action.” The majority has affirmed the trial court’s decision to grant “defendant’s motion
for dismissal for improper joinder.” Clearly, the trial court’s decision is barred by this court rule. If
defendant is correct in asserting that plaintiffs’ respective claims did not fall within MCR 2.206, which
allows the permissive joinder of parties, the proper remedy is severance of the actions, not dismissal.
MCR 2.207. Additionally, had the court ordered the actions severed rather than dismissed, the court
would have obviated the need for its unorthodox order declaring the statute of limitations tolled, an
order of questionable validity.
I would reverse.
* Circuit judge, sitting on the Court of Appeals by assignment.
/s/ Peter D. O’Connell
-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.
