- 26 -
deceased client is revoked. Therefore, she contends, Mr. Young's
authority to represent her husband terminated upon Mr.
Dornbrock's death. Mrs. Dornbrock's aforementioned statement of
Michigan law is accurate. Indeed,
The rule in Michigan is that the authority of an attorney is
revoked and the attorney-client relationship is terminated
when the client dies. Doty v. Dexter (1886), 61 Mich. 348,
28 N.W. 123; Courser v. Jackson (1909), 159 Mich. 119, 123
N.W. 604. See generally, 7 C.J.S. Attorney and Client �
113, p.945.
Wright v. Estate of Treichel, 36 Mich. App. at 36, 193 N.W.2d at
395 (1971); see also Henritzy v. General Electric Co., 182 Mich.
App. 1, 451 N.W.2d 558 (1990). For purposes of this discussion,
this Court assumes that Mr. Young's authority to represent Mr.
Dornbrock terminated with his death in July 1987.
Nevertheless, Mrs. Dornbrock has failed to show that any of
Mr. Young's actions subsequent to Mr. Dornbrock's death amounted
to fraud on the Court. Mr. Young is an attorney; however, he
does not possess the ability to read the minds of his clients.
Mr. Young was notified of Mr. Dornbrock's death; however, he was
not instructed to discontinue his representation of Mr.
Dornbrock. When Mr. Young was made aware of the death of Mr.
Dornbrock, he took the appropriate action of moving this Court to
substitute parties, as provided for in Nordstrom v. Commissioner,
50 T.C. 30 (1968), to protect the interest of Mr. Dornbrock in
this case. Mr. Young's substitution of parties, prior to signing
the stipulated decision in this case, was in the best interest of
Page: Previous 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011