Whether a devisee under a will was a real party in interest; MCL 700.3101; Personal representative (PR)

Concluding that the “trial court erred when it determined there was no dispute of material fact that plaintiff was not a real party in interest” as to her claims involving the property at issue, the court vacated summary disposition for defendants and remanded. The case concerned “a parcel of property (the Property) owned by” the decedent, who was plaintiff’s mother and defendant-Kashat’s grandmother. Plaintiff (now deceased) was the PR of the decedent’s estate. The estate’s only asset is the property. Plaintiff “allegedly signed a quitclaim deed, transferring the Property from decedent’s estate to plaintiff and Kashat, with rights of survivorship.” She brought the case in her individual capacity, not as a PR of the estate. The trial court concluded “there was no dispute of fact that plaintiff was not a real party in interest. It relied on [her] admission that if the” deed was determined “to be fraudulent, the Property would return to the decedent’s estate.” On appeal, the court noted that decedent’s “will established that plaintiff was the devisee of the Property. A real party in interest” is someone who has a vested right of action on a claim. “Further, devisees are proper parties to litigation concerning a decedent’s real estate.” Thus, the trial court erred. The court noted that the “trial court did not address the substantive arguments regarding defendants’ motion for summary disposition under MCR 2.116(C)(10) with respect to plaintiff’s claims of: (1) quiet title; (2) slander of title; (3) statutory slander of title; (4) conversion; and (5) ‘eviction.’” As a result, the court remanded. Because it reversed “the grant of summary disposition, plaintiff may revisit her argument that discovery was concluded prematurely as well as her request to amend her complaint.”