Gherardini v. Ford Motor Co., 57118
| Decision Date | 23 July 1975 |
| Docket Number | No. 57118,57118 |
| Parties | Peter A. GHERARDINI and Florence V. Gherardini, as Spouse of Peter A. Gherardini, Plaintiffs-Appellees, and City of Dearborn, a Michigan Municipal Corporation, Intervening Plaintiff-Appellant, v. FORD MOTOR COMPANY, a corporation, Defendant. |
| Court | Michigan Supreme Court |
Carl P. Garlow, Asst. Corp. Counsel, Legal Dept., Dearborn, for appellant City of Dearborn.
Leonard C. Jaques, P.C., by Robert E. Swickle, Detroit, for appellees Gherardini.
Peter Gherardini was a City of Dearborn fireman who was injured in a fire at a Ford Motor Company plant. The city paid workmen's compensation benefits. Gherardini won a third party action against the Ford Motor Company, and the city, as subrogee, obtained $90,000 of the verdict as reimbursement for compensation benefits previously paid.
Gherardini's lawyer sought and was allowed to recover a 40% Attorney fee against the city. Because the city's lawyer had participated at trial, Gherardini's lawyer was surcharged $1,750 for his services. The city was ordered to pay Gherardini's lawyer $34,250 (40% Of $90,000 less $1,750).
The city filed a claim of appeal which the Court of Appeals dismissed because the order setting attorney fees 'is a post-judgment order, ancillary to the original judgment, and is appealable only by the filing of an application for leave to appeal, pursuant to GCR 806.2(2).'
The city moves for leave to appeal the dismissal of its appeal. Its application is granted and this Court Sua sponte, pursuant to GCR 1963, 865.1(7) reverses the Court of Appeals, remands to the Court of Appeals and orders the city's claim reinstated as an appeal as of right.
The fact that the judgment on the jury's verdict was appealable as of right--without regard to whether it was appealed--does mot determine the appealability of the post-judgment order establishing the amount of attorney fees. The post-judgment order affected with finality rights of the parties and was, therefore, appealable as of right. Equitable Trust Co. v. Bankers Trust Co., 268 Mich. 394, 397--398, 256 N.W. 460 (1934). See Detroit Trust Co. v. Blakely, 359 Mich. 621, 628--634, 103 N.W.2d 413 (1960), where an order allowing attorney fees, entered after the entry of an order disposing of the meritorious question, was held to be appealable as of right on authority of Equitable Trust. See, also, People v. Pickett, 391 Mich. 305, 215 N.W.2d 695 (1974), where this...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Dean v. Tucker, Docket No. 104813
...the context of a postjudgment order as an order which affects with finality the rights of the parties, citing Gherardini v. Ford Motor Co., 394 Mich. 430, 231 N.W.2d 643 (1975).2 Although not relevant to this appeal, we do note that this is not true where an appeal is taken from an order ce......
-
Macomb County Taxpayers Ass'n v. L'Anse Creuse Public Schools, Docket No. 172066
...on January 7, 1994, with a timely appeal being filed on January 26, 1994, pursuant to MCR 7.203(A)(1). In Gherardini v. Ford Motor Co., 394 Mich. 430, 431, 231 N.W.2d 643 (1975), our Supreme Court addressed the issue of appeals of postjudgment orders setting attorney fees. The Court held: T......
-
Eriksen v. Fisher
...of the parties. Equitable Trust Co. v. Bankers Trust Co., 268 Mich. 394, 397-398, 256 N.W. 460 (1934); Gherardini v. Ford Motor Co., 394 Mich. 430, 431, 231 N.W.2d 643 (1975). The May 28, 1985, order "IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Plaintiffs shall set aside immediately the prev......
-
Gove v. Gove
...to review had been submitted, and therefore dismissed the appeal. Subsequently, however, the Supreme Court, in Gherardini v. Ford Motor Co., 394 Mich. 430, 231 N.W.2d 643 (1975), held that an appeal from a post-judgment order awarding attorney fees was an appeal as of right. The court reaso......