e-Journal Summary

e-Journal Number : 51702
Opinion Date : 05/17/2012
e-Journal Date : 05/23/2012
Court : Michigan Court of Appeals
Case Name : Solom v. Yuhasey
Practice Area(s) : Personal Protection Orders
Judge(s) : Per Curiam - Markey, Beckering, and M.J. Kelly
Full Text Opinion
Issues:

Respondent's motion to terminate the PPO issued to petitioner; Whether the issue was moot; B P 7 v. Bureau of State Lottery; People v. Cathey; Hayford v. Hayford

Summary

Since the PPO at issue expired by its own terms while the case was pending on appeal, the court held that the issue was now moot and dismissed the appeal. Petitioner requested an ex parte PPO on 1/13/11, which the trial court signed into effect the next day. Respondent moved to terminate the order. After a hearing the trial court denied her motion and continued the PPO, which was scheduled to remain in effect until 1/14/12. An appellate court will not generally decide moot issues. "An issue is deemed moot when an event occurs that renders it impossible for a reviewing court to grant relief." Because the PPO expired by its own terms, it was not possible now to rectify the alleged undue restraint of respondent's actions as a result of the PPO during the time before its expiration. Respondent did not show that additional PPOs will be issued against her. Further, the record lacked any evidence to indicate that the issuance of the PPO resulted in any collateral consequences that continue to affect respondent.

Full Text Opinion