RIVER VALLEY SCHOOL DISTRICT V. MARY LOUISE CHAMBERLAIN WARREN

STATE OF MICHIGAN
IN THE COURT FOR THE COUNTY OF BERRIEN
CASE NO. 23-0228-CH-S
Hon. Sterling R. Schrock
RIVER VALLEY SCHOOL DISTRICT, a Michigan general powers school district,
Plaintiff,
v.
MARY LOUISE CHAMBERLAIN WARREN, or her unknown heirs, assignees, and devisees; WILLIAM H. WARREN; JAMES H. WARREN; KETIRIA W. HUGGARD; BARBARA G. PARRISH; CHARLES E. WHALEN Ill; MARYANN CAMPION; DIANA LUNT; HELEN WARREN; ROXANNE CARGILL; JOHN GRAHAM; ELIZABETH B. BROWN; ERIC A. BROWN; and THE EDWARD K. WARREN FOUNDATION, or its unknown heirs and assignees,
Defendants.
_____________________________
Gordon W. VanWieren, Jr. (P35829)
Piotr M. Matusiak (P8l229)
THRUN LAW FIRM, P.C.
Attorneys for Plaintiff
2900 West Road, Suite 400
East Lansing, MI 48826-2575
Telephone: (517) 484-8000
_____________________________
ORDER FOR SUBSTITUTE SERVICE OF PROCESS AND OTHER PAPERS
An action seeking fee simple title to real property located at 100 Oak Street, Three Oaks, Michigan 49128, Parcel Nos. 11-47-0002-0073-01-4 and 1-47-0340-0017-00-1 has been commenced by the Plaintiff against the Defendants. For the reasons set forth in Plaintiff’s Verified Motion for Substitute Service of Process and Other Papers and Plaintiff’s accompanying brief, filed with this Court, this Court finds that Plaintiff has shown that service of process cannot reasonably be made on the following defendants under MCR 2.105, except under MCR 2.105(1): (1) Mary Louise Chamberlain Warren (“Mary Warren”), (2) Mary Warren’s unknown heirs, assignees. and devisees (“Unknown Warren Defendants”), (3) The Edward K. Warren Foundation (“Foundation”), and (4) the Foundation’s unknown heirs and assignees (“Unknown Foundation Defendants”) (all of the defendants listed in this sentence, the “Substitute Service Defendants”).
The Court further finds, pursuant to MCR 2.105(1) and MCR 2.106, that service of process by publication is the best available method of service of process reasonably calculated to give the Substitute Service Defendants actual notice of the proceedings and an opportunity to be heard. The Court also finds that Plaintiff does not know the present or last known address of Mary Warren, the Unknown Warren Defendants, and the Unknown Foundation Defendants and cannot ascertain it after diligent inquiry.
The Court decides not to conduct a hearing on Plaintiff’s Motion, as permitted by MCR 2.105(J)(2).
IT IS ORDERED:
1. Plaintiff may complete service of process on the Substitute Service Defendants by publishing a copy of this Order once each week for a period of three consecutive weeks in a newspaper, as defined in MCR 2.106(F), that is published in Berrien County. The Substitute Service Defendants must – in this Court – answer or take other action permitted by law within 28 days after the last date of publication. If the Substitute Service Defendants do not answer or take other action within the time allowed, then judgment may be entered against those defendants for the relief demanded in the complaint.
2. Plaintiff is not required to mail a copy of this Order under MCR 2.106(D)(2), except to the Foundation’s last known address: R.R. 1, Box 210, Three Oaks, 49128.
5.. The Court will not conduct a hearing on Plaintiffs Motion, as permitted by MCR 2.105(J)(2).
This order does not resolve the last pending claim in this case and does not close this case.
Dated: October 16, 2023
Signed: Honorable
Sterling S. Schrock
(11-23)(12-07)