Appellate jurisdiction; Aggrieved party; MCR 7.203(A)(1); Dora v Lesinski; Stipulated dismissal; Distinguishing Jaber v P & P Hospitality, LLC; Consent order; Reservation of appellate rights; No-fault insurance; PIP benefits; Assignment

The court held that it lacked jurisdiction over plaintiff’s appeal because she was not an aggrieved party after stipulating to dismissal of her remaining claims with prejudice without reserving appellate rights. Plaintiff filed a first-party no-fault action seeking PIP benefits after a motor-vehicle accident. The trial court granted defendant-Farmers partial summary disposition on certain medical-expense claims based on an assignment to a medical provider. The parties later stipulated to dismiss the remaining claims with prejudice and submit the matter to binding arbitration. On appeal, the court held that plaintiff could not appeal from the stipulated final order because “[a] party is not aggrieved . . . by an order to which that party has consented,” and a stipulated order reflects “the parties’ agreement rather than a judicial determination of contested rights.” The court further held that a party may preserve review of an earlier interlocutory ruling in a stipulated dismissal, but “where a party agrees to a final dismissal with the same opposing party and fails to reserve appellate rights, the stipulated dismissal extinguishes any claim of appeal from earlier rulings involving that party.” Applying that rule, the court reasoned that the stipulated order broadly dismissed plaintiff’s remaining claims against Farmers with prejudice and “contains no such reservation.” The court also distinguished Jaber because that case involved a later stipulated dismissal with a different defendant, while here “Farmers both obtained the partial summary disposition ruling and was a party to the later stipulated dismissal[.]” Because plaintiff failed to preserve appellate review in the stipulated order, she was not aggrieved under MCR 7.203(A)(1). Dismissed.