Preview:

STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS

KHRUSO PARVEZ and MARBIL MACHINING, COMPANY, Plaintiffs/Counter DefendantsAppellants/Cross Appellees, and ZUBIA PARVEZ, Plaintiff-Appellant/Cross Appellee, v JERROLD M. BIGELMAN, GUTMAN & BIGELMAN, P.C., and MARTHA SORRENTINO, Defendants, and GREGORY SORRENTINO and AUTO TECH ENGINEERING, INC., Defendants/Counter Plaintiffs, and MARTIN L. FRIED and GOLDSTEIN, BERSHAD, FRIED & LIEBERMAN, P.C., Defendants/Counter PlaintiffsAppellees/Cross Appellants. No. 255437 Oakland Circuit Court LC No. 01-035806-NM UNPUBLISHED December 20, 2005

Before: Owens, P.J., and Saad and Fort Hood, JJ. PER CURIAM.

-1-

In this action alleging defamation and tortious interference with a business relationship or expectancy, plaintiffs appeal by right from the trial court's order granting the motion of defendants Martin L. Fried and Goldstein, Bershad, Fried & Lieberman, P.C.,1 for summary disposition. Defendants cross appeal by right from the trial court's order denying their motion for sanctions for the filing of a frivolous lawsuit. We affirm. This appeal is being decided without oral argument pursuant to MCR 7.214(E). Plaintiffs' various claims arise from a transaction in which plaintiff Khruso Parvez purchased the stock of plaintiff Marbil Machining Company from the company's previous owner, Gregory Sorrentino. Parvez's indebtedness to Sorrentino from the sale was secured by all of Marbil's accounts receivable pursuant to a recorded UCC financing statement. Parvez apparently defaulted on his obligations to Sorrentino, who then retained Fried for the purpose of collecting Marbil's accounts receivable. Fried, acting on behalf of Sorrentino, distributed letters to Marbil's customers indicating that Sorrentino had a perfected security interest in all of Marbil's receivables and that, "[o]n account of a default in that debt, and pursuant to Michigan Compiled Laws

Download KHRUSO PARVEZ V JERROLD M BIGELMAN.pdf

Michigan Law