e-Journal Summary

e-Journal Number : 39515
Opinion Date : 05/29/2008
e-Journal Date : 06/05/2008
Court : Michigan Court of Appeals
Case Name : Howard v. Howard
Practice Area(s) : Personal Protection Orders
Judge(s) : Memorandum - Davis, Murray, and Beckering
Full Text Opinion

Whether the issues raised by the respondents regarding the trial court's denial of their motions to modify or terminate personal protection orders against them were moot; Whether it was impossible for the court to grant the relief requested; B P 7 v. Bureau of State Lottery; Contesti v. Attorney Gen.


Since each PPO at issue had expired on its own terms, the court could grant no relief and dismissed respondents' appeals of the trial court's order denying their requests to modify or terminate the PPOs against them. An "issue is deemed moot when an event occurs that renders it impossible for a reviewing court to grant relief." As a general rule, an appellate court will not decide moot issues. Respondents did not invoke the doctrine "according to which a court may resolve technically moot issue if it is one of public significance that is likely to recur while evading judicial review." All three PPO orders had expired by their own terms in March 2008. Dismissed as moot.

Full Text Opinion