A decision as lovely as a tree

333 N.W.2d 67

William L. FISHER, Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

Karen LOWE, Larry Moffet and State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company,

Defendants-Appellees.

Docket No. 60732.

Submitted Nov. 3, 1982.

Decided Jan. 10, 1983.

Released for Publications May 6, 1983.


A wayward Chevy struck a tree Whose owner sued defendants three. He sued car's owner, driver too, And insurer for what was due For his oak tree that now may bear A lasting need for tender care.
The Oakland County Circuit Court, John N. O'Brien, J., set forth The judgment that defendants sought And quickly an appeal was brought.
Court of Appeals, J.H. Gillis, J., Gave thought and then had this to say: 1) There is no liability Since No-Fault grants immunity; 2) No jurisdiction can be found Where process service is unsound; And thus the judgment, as it's termed, Is due to be, and is,
Affirmed.



Defendant's Chevy struck a tree-- There was no liability; The No-Fault Act comes into play As owner and the driver say;

Barred by the Act's immunity, No suit in tort will aid the tree; Although the oak's in disarray, No court can make defendants pay, M.C.L.A. § 500.3135.


No jurisdiction could be found Where process service was unsound; In personam jurisdiction Was not even legal fiction Where plaintiff failed to well comply With rules of court that did apply. GCR 1963, 105.4.William L. Fisher, Troy, in pro. per.
Romain, Donofrio & Kuck, P.C. by Ernst W. Kuck, Southfield, for defendants-appellees.

Before BRONSON, P.J., and V.J. BRENNAN and J.H. GILLIS, JJ.


J.H. GILLIS, Judge.
We thought that we would never see
A suit to compensate a tree.
A suit whose claim in tort is prest
Upon a mangled tree's behest;
A tree whose battered trunk was prest
Against a Chevy's crumpled crest;
A tree that faces each new day
With bark and limb in disarray;
A tree that may forever bear
A lasting need for tender care.
Flora lovers though we three,
We must uphold the court's decree.
Affirmed. [FN1]


back