Advertisement

Last Thursday Circuit Court Judge Donald Teeple decided how the $2.95 million award would be distributed among the family, including Michael Wallace's father, brother and grandmother. The lawyer for the children's interests had recommended the extended family receive nothing. When the lawyers couldn't agree on an amount, family and friends spent the day airing family problems concerning money and how close family members were to each other.

Teeple had originally ordered the Michigan Department of State Police to pay Michael Wallace's estate over $4.4 million for the loss of society and companionship and loss of financial support.

Wallace, 32, of Sandusky died after his motorcycle collided with a state police cruiser the night of Sept. 1, 2005, in Watertown Township south of Sandusky. Trooper Fred Sweeney, then assigned to the Sandusky Post, was north bound on M-19 and turning left into the parking lot of Summit Power Center when the police car was struck by the south bound motorcycle.

Wallace never regained consciousness after the crash and was pronounced dead a few hours later.

Michael Wallace left a daughter, Cady, by his wife Colleen, and a son, Alec by a previous relationship. Colleen was approximately eight months pregnant with daughter Riley at the time of his death.

Teeple said, "(the law) says you can receive money for the loss of companionship, but it does not seem to apply to the state according to four on the Supreme Court.

"This group of four decided when it is the state that damages you, you do not get anything for the loss of heart (companionship), maybe not get anything. They changed decades of law," he explained to the audience.

According to the judge, the Supreme Court's decision on another case impacted the Wallace case, which the state police had appealed to the Court of Appeals. It also effected the lawsuit Colleen had filed against the trooper.

The state gave up their appeal on the trooper lawsuit because they were afraid they would end up owing even more money, according to the extended family's lawyer. So the state kicked in another $543,000 to cover the trooper lawsuit to the $2.4 million the settlement Teeple had ordered.

Distribution
The legal costs for items such as expert witnesses come off the top, then the lawyer's one third contingency fee.

The legal fees and costs Sandusky attorney John Paterson will receive amount to about $1.113 million. Paterson represented the Wallace estate in the lawsuit against the Michigan State Police.

That leaves a total of $1.836 million to distribute among the family.

Teeple determined Colleen should receive 80% and the three children 20% of the state police settlement. The additional settlement for the trooper's liability will be divided 60% to Colleen, 20% to the children, 10% to Wallace's father Michael J. Wallace, 5% to his brother Norman and 5% to his grandmother Reva Wallace. According to the children's lawyer, the extended family wanted more than $500,000. Now they will divide about $66,000.

The judge reminded everyone the children's money cannot be touched without the permission of the probate court.

Family problems
For the first few years of their marriage Michael Wallace and his wife Colleen lived in one of three homes on the Wallace family farm. He worked full time as an electrian and part-time on the farm. He received no salary and was not reimbursed to improvements to the old farmhouse, but paid no rent. In 2003 Wallace moved his family off the farm.

Here is where the difference of opinion comes in.

His aunt and uncle --Debbie and Robert Mintz --and wife contend Wallace left the farming operation.

"He was unhappyÉHe had to make a choice between his family and the farmÉHe wanted the house in his name with Colleen. He felt used and manipulated," stated Debbie.

"He was tired of being used and was concerned about his inheritanceÉHe didn't see any future there," Robert testified.

"We wanted security for our family. We wanted to fail or succeed on our own labor, not have our success determined by others. He (her father-in-law) would not deed the house over," stated Colleen.

Colleen and a family friend both testified she did not get along with Mike Sr.

She said her husband was "devastated" over the things that were said and done when he left the farm.

Norman and Michael Sr. maintained Wallace had not left the farming operation and they all still got along. Reva testified if there was a rift she was not aware of it.

In fact the Wallaces testified Michael continued to come over and help out on the farm, mainly by repairing equipment.

Norman said the brothers got closer as they got older, especially after their mother died in an automobile accident. He said they purchased nearby farms so he and Michael could each have one.

However, as attorney Robert Abbott pointed out, Michael Sr. had been changing the deeds to all the property, dropping his mother's name, and adding his second wife and his name. The sons' names weren't on any deeds at the time of Wallace's death, and the deeds are still only in Michael Sr. and his wife's names.

"Isn't it usual for the father to put his son's name on property to keep him interested?" stated Abbott.

Michael Sr. repeatedly testified that his son knew he was getting the farm, and the will said so. However, the attorney pointed out the deeds superceded the will, which he apparently wrote himself.

Abbott also noted Wallace traded his share of the farm equipment to his brother, not the action of a man who intended to stay in farming.

Later Michael Sr. testified he was told they left the farm "because Colleen blew up". His son "left the house because he wanted a house of his own" and "to please everybody".

Colleen also said her in-laws didn't offer any emotional or financial support after her husband died, and didn't attempt to see the children.

Michael Sr. and his mother said they called but Colleen did not return their calls. Michael Sr. said she would not open the door if he went over to her house.