GLORIA MURPHY V SEAN M MURPHY (Memorandum)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
GLORIA MURPHY,
UNPUBLISHED
July 19, 2011
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v
No. 297500
Jackson Circuit Court
LC No. 10-000466-PP
SEAN M. MURPHY,
Defendant-Appellant.
Before: SAAD, P.J., and JANSEN and DONOFRIO, JJ.
MEMORANDUM.
Respondent Sean M. Murphy appeals the trial court’s March 26, 2010 order that denied
his motion to modify or terminate petitioner’s personal protection order (PPO) against him. We
dismiss this appeal as moot.
Generally, this Court will not review a moot issue. B P 7 v Bureau of State Lottery, 231
Mich App 356, 359; 586 NW2d 117 (1998). “A case is moot when it presents only abstract
questions of law that do not rest upon existing facts or rights[,]” and “[a]n issue is deemed moot
when an event occurs that renders it impossible for a reviewing court to grant relief.” Id.
The PPO expired on its own terms on February 18, 2011, but respondent argues that he is
still affected by the expired PPO because it remains in the Law Enforcement Information
Network system. However, respondent fails to allege any future collateral consequences from
the expired PPO that are distinguishable from the collateral consequences he already experiences
as a result of his previous criminal convictions. We are not required to discover or rationalize a
basis for respondent’s claims if he merely announces a position and gives it cursory treatment.
Houghton v Keller, 256 Mich App 336, 339; 662 NW2d 854 (2003). Furthermore, the expired
PPO does not affect respondent’s ability to receive Social Security Disability Insurance benefits.
None of the issues respondent raises on appeal warrant review because they are not of public
significance, and likely to recur yet evade judicial review. See Detroit v Ambassador Bridge Co,
481 Mich 29, 50; 748 NW2d 221 (2008). Accordingly, we are unable to grant meaningful relief
to respondent. B P 7, 231 Mich App at 359.
-1-
Appeal dismissed.
/s/ Henry William Saad
/s/ Kathleen Jansen
/s/ Pat M. Donofrio
-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.
