LISA ANN DETTLOFF V DENNIS MICHAEL DETTLOFF
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
LISA ANN DETTLOFF,
UNPUBLISHED
December 21, 2006
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v
No. 268551
Presque Isle Circuit Court
LC No. 03-082567-DM
DENNIS MICHAEL DETTLOFF,
Defendant-Appellant.
Before: Sawyer, P.J., and Wilder and Servitto, JJ.
SERVITTO, J. (concurring in part and dissenting in part).
I agree with the majority that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in awarding shortterm spousal support and awarding physical custody of the parties’ minor children to plaintiff.
However, I respectfully disagree with the majority’s conclusion regarding enforcement of the
parties’ purported agreement concerning the marital home.
The standard indicated in Lentz v Lentz, 271 Mich App 465; 721 NW2d 861 (2006) is
that courts are bound by property settlements reached through negotiations. Here, there is no
indication that the parties engaged in any negotiations with respect to the agreement. Rather,
defendant drafted the agreement and simply presented it to plaintiff for her signature during a
November 2003 attempt at reconciliation.
Moreover, there is no indication plaintiff received any benefit from signing the
agreement. Plaintiff testified at the hearing that she signed the agreement as a gesture of
goodwill. While the parties did reconcile for a short time during the period in which the
agreement was signed, defendant testified that signing the agreement was not a precondition to
or part of their effort to reconcile. Given that complete failure of consideration can be grounds
for rescission, (See Adell Broadcasting Corp v Apex Media Sales, Inc, 269 Mich App 6, 12-13;
708 NW2d 778 (2005)) I cannot say that the trial court abused its discretion in refusing to
enforce the agreement. While the trial court refused to enforce the agreement because it was
suspiciously made without the advice of counsel, at a time when both parties were represented
by counsel, and because it did not constitute a comprehensive property settlement, I would
nevertheless find that the trial court reached the right result, albeit for the wrong reason (Etefia v
Credit Technologies Inc, 245 Mich App 466, 470; 628 NW2d 577 (2001)), and would affirm the
trial court’s ruling regarding enforcement of the parties’ agreement concerning the marital home.
/s/ Deborah A. Servitto
-1-
-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.
