Trespass & tree removal; Treble damages; MCL 600.2919(1); Corrective documents; Subject-matter jurisdiction; Ruling in a prior quiet title action; Salyer v Walker (Unpub); Effect of a stay of proceedings on the trial court’s authority to issue a contempt order; Contempt sanction; Attorney fees; Whether certain documents were “in issue” in this case; Frivolous claims; Personal representative (PR)

The court held, among other things, that defendant-Salyer “failed to state a valid defense to the trespass claim, and the” trial court properly granted plaintiff-PR (Walker) summary disposition. Further, where it was undisputed that Salyer intentionally trespassed on the 79-acre parcel and removed trees without Walker’s permission, he was properly held liable under MCL 600.2919(1) for treble damages. Salyer took issue with the trial “court’s conclusion that he committed trespass on the 79-acre parcel.” It was undisputed that he “intentionally intruded on the 79-acre parcel and that he did so without Walker’s permission.” Further, he did “not dispute that he intentionally entered the 79-acre parcel with the aim to have the lumber company cut and remove trees under their contract.” However, he contended “that Walker did not have the right of exclusive possession because Walker failed to produce a deed transferring the 79-acre parcel from Salyer to the Estate. This Court’s prior decision in Salyer, however, resolves this issue, where we observed that Salyer had admitted that he intended to transfer the 79-acre farm to Evelyn via the 2015 quitclaim deed.” Salyer’s claim “that he did not trespass because he owned the parcel is merely an attempt to relitigate a matter that has been finally decided.” In the prior action, he failed to respond to Walker’s interrogatories and requests for admissions, which were deemed admitted. As the court “explained in Salyer, ‘[o]nce a matter is admitted, it is “conclusively established unless the court on motion permits withdrawal or amendment of an admission.”’” The court noted that “Salyer never moved to withdraw or to amend.” Thus, his “admission that he deeded the 79-acre parcel to Evelyn negated the need for Walker to produce a transfer deed, and established that Walker had exclusive possession of the land. Accordingly, Walker demonstrated the requisite elements of trespass and was entitled to summary disposition.” Among other things, the court also held that the trial court had authority to issue its civil contempt order despite a stay of proceedings and it did not abuse its discretion in awarding Walker $2,500 in attorney fees. Affirmed.