SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(US)(ca6) 52

COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT
Frank Fisher – Appellant
Versus
Michelle Perron – Respondent



UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT

┐ FRANK J. FISHER, │ Plaintiff-Appellant, │ > No. 21-1184 │ v. │ │ MICHELLE M. PERRON, │ Defendant-Appellee. │ ┘ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan at Port Huron. No. 3:20-cv-12403—Robert H. Cleland, District Judge.

Decided and Filed: March 23, 2022

Before: GILMAN, STRANCH, and NALBANDIAN, Circuit Judges.

_________________

COUNSEL ON BRIEF: James W. Rose, Ethan R. Holtz, JAFFE RAITT HEUER & WEISS, P.C.., Southfield, Michigan, for Appellee. Frank J. Fisher, McLean, Virginia, pro se. _________________

OPINION _________________

JANE B. STRANCH, Circuit Judge. Frank J. Fisher alleges that his sister, Michelle M. Perron, violated federal and state law by recording various phone conversations among himself, Perron, and two other siblings that discussed their late mother’s estate and related litigation. The district court dismissed his complaint with prejudice for failure to state a claim. Because the complaint fails to allege facts sufficient to state a claim under either the relevant state or federal laws, we AFFIRM the district court’s dismissal of the case. No. 21-1184 Fisher v. Perron Page 2

I. BACKGROUND1

Fisher and Perron are siblings and children of the late Anne Markley Spivak. Fisher is the personal representative of his mother’s estate, and he serves as a co-trustee of the Anne M. Spivak Revocable Trust with Perron and Peter B. Spivak, Jr., his brother. Fisher is also a co- trustee with his brother, Peter P. Perron, of the Anne M. Spivak Testamentary Trust. Fisher and Michelle Perron have clashed over decisions related to these estate entities, and Fisher alleges that Perron intended to use these disagreements to gain a greater portion of Spivak’s estate. The conflicts about the estate, according to Fisher, led Perron to plan litigation against Fisher and the co-trustees of the trusts.

The heart of the complaint is Fisher’s allegation, on information and belief, that Perron made “at least fourteen illegal recordings of telephone calls” with Fisher, either alone or with their other siblings, almost all of which related to the Spivak estate. The recording of one call is certain: a February 18, 2018 call between Perron and Peter Spivak in Michigan, Fisher in Virginia, and Peter Perron in Washington. Perron did not inform any of the siblings that she was recording the call. According to Fisher, the call included “private facts about [his] private life,” including details about his legal conflicts with Perron over their mother’s estate, information on the administration of the Spivak estate and Revocable Trust, and financial and tax information. Perron shared her recording with her attorney and third parties. The complaint alleges, on information and belief, that Perron recorded other calls without the consent of her siblings and shared those recordings with her attorney and third parties.

In September 2

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top