Small Mistakes, Big Consequences
I was chatting with a lawyer who is a world-class brief writer. She recently filed a motion for relief under a certain court rule. She cited the rule three times in her motion. But then, the fourth time, in her prayer for relief section, she had a typographical error. And the judge denied her motion, because she was asking for relief under a nonexistent rule. It’s an arbitrary and unfair result, but we brief writers have to be vigilant about proofreading. It’s not just to avoid distracting the reader. And it’s not just to maintain our credibility with the reader. One mistake could have massive consequences.
In a recent opinion issued by the Michigan Court of Appeals, Master Beat, Inc. v. Skill, 2024 WL 878030 (Mich. App. Feb. 29, 2024), a founding member of the Romantics had sued another founding member for control of the band’s finances, bringing claims including breach of fiduciary duty and conversion. The plaintiff moved for summary judgment, arguing that there was no question of material fact that the defendant had diverted royalties to himself and had taken money from the band’s bank account without authority.
The defendant filed a brief purportedly in opposition to the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment. The brief was titled as the defendant’s opposing brief, included a conclusory prayer for relief in the defendant’s favor, and was signed by the defendant’s counsel. But the rest of the brief was a verbatim copy of the plaintiff’s brief in support of summary judgment.
The next day, the defendant attempted to file an amended brief, but the trial court rejected the filing and granted summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff, including treble damages. The defendant filed a motion for relief from judgment, blaming her paralegal who apparently filed the wrong brief. But the trial court denied the motion, holding that a mistake by an attorney is not grounds for granting such relief. And the Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it refused to grant relief in the face of counsel’s carelessness.
When it is a matter of judicial discretion, many judges are loath to decide cases based on attorney error and will go out of their way to let the parties obtain a decision on the merits. But some judges are sticklers even for technicalities. If you do not know the proclivities of your judge, you should act in an abundance of caution. And if you have reason to believe your judge is disinclined to overlook attorney error, then you need to have a second or third set of eyes on your work product before filing.