Failure to appear for trial; Dismissal; MCR 2.504(B)(1); Inherent authority to sanction; Maldonado v Ford Motor Co; Lesser sanctions; Vicencio v Ramirez; Woods v SLB Prop Mgmt, LLC; Judicial bias; Waiver

The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing plaintiff’s negligence action after he failed to appear for trial. Plaintiff proceeded in propria persona after remand from an earlier appeal, repeatedly failed to comply with discovery, refused to appear for his deposition, and did not appear at the pretrial or trial. The court first held that plaintiff waived any implied judicial-bias claim because he did not seek disqualification below and made no showing that review was necessary to prevent a “miscarriage of justice.” Turning to dismissal, the court recognized that dismissal is “‘a drastic step that should be taken cautiously,’” but held that the Vicencio and Woods considerations supported the trial court’s ruling. Plaintiff had notice that trial was scheduled, told the clerk he had filed an appeal and therefore would not appear, and refused even after the trial court offered him the option of appearing by Zoom. The court reasoned that plaintiff’s absence was “willful and deliberate,” that he had a history of discovery noncompliance and delay, and that prior orders had not secured compliance. Because a “lesser sanction would not better serve the interests of justice[,]” the trial court acted within its discretion by dismissing the case. Affirmed.