Powell v. Southfield Motel Associates
Powell v. Southfield Motel Associates
Opinion of the Court
The issue raised on this interlocutory appeal is whether a principal defendant, having properly impleaded a third-party defendant pursuant to GCR 1963, 204, may assert a claim against the third-party defendant in an amount in excess of the principal plaintiffs claim. The trial court answered this question in the negative.
The difficulty lies in the wording of Rule 204, which is derived from FR Civ P, 14. The Federal courts, constructing Federal Rule 14, have split on this issue;
Therefore, the principal defendant should be permitted to assert its claim, despite the fact that it exceeds the amount involved in the principal claim. Any prejudice which might result from a consolidation of the principal claim and the third-party claim may be obviated by resort to separate trials of the separate claims, pursuant to GCR 1963, 505.2. While separate trials of the individual claims is permissible, dismissal of the third-party claim is improper, absent a showing of probable prolonged delay, which is not made on this record. Cf. Moyses v Spartan Asphalt Paving Co, 383 Mich 314 (1970).
Reversed and remanded for further proceedings. Costs to abide outcome.
Noland Co v Graver Tank & Manufacturing Co, 301 F2d 43 (CA 4, 1962); Schwab v Erie Lackawanna R Co, 438 F2d 62 (CA 3, 1971).
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.