e-Journal Summary

e-Journal Number : 46224
Opinion Date : 06/29/2010
e-Journal Date : 07/06/2010
Court : Michigan Court of Appeals
Case Name : Gillem v. Lattore
Practice Area(s) : Personal Protection Orders
Judge(s) : Per Curiam - Cavanagh and Fitzgerald; Concurrence - Zahra
Full Text Opinion
Issues:

Whether the trial court properly denied respondent-Lattore's motion to terminate a PPO; "Mootness"; B P 7 v. Bureau of State Lottery; Hayford v. Hayford

Summary

Since the PPO in this case expired on 2/10/10, it was impossible or unnecessary for the court to fashion any remedy, even if any of respondent's objections were found to have merit. Thus, the court dismissed the appeal as moot. As a general rule, an appellate court will not decide moot issues. An issue is deemed moot when an event occurs rendering it impossible for a reviewing court to grant relief. Because the PPO expired by its own terms, there was nothing for the court to dissolve, and remand to the trial court for a new hearing would serve no purpose. Further, the court concluded the issues were without public significance and noted the respondent did not assert the existence of any collateral negative consequences of the continued existence of the now-expired PPO.

Full Text Opinion