Reconsideration standard; Shenandoah Ridge Condo Ass’n v Bodary; Late response to a summary disposition motion; MCR 2.116(G)(1)(a)(ii)

The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration after plaintiff failed to file a timely response to a motion for summary disposition. Plaintiff sued his insurer, a municipality, and an officer after two crashes. The trial court issued a hearing date for the municipal defendants’ summary disposition motion, but a scheduling order was misfiled and not provided to plaintiff. The trial court decided the motion on the merits without oral argument when plaintiff filed no response, and later denied reconsideration. On appeal, the court explained that a party seeking reconsideration must show a palpable error and that correction would yield a different result. The court noted that, absent a court-set period, MCR 2.116(G)(1)(a)(ii) provides that a response is due at least seven days before the hearing, and that the misfiled order did not relieve plaintiff of complying with that rule. The court observed that plaintiff undisputedly had notice of the hearing date, so the failure to respond remained a violation of the filing deadline. The trial court did not have to consider plaintiff’s late responsive arguments. Because no palpable error was shown, the court affirmed.