The Michigan Court of Appeals refused to upset a stipulation regarding two contiguous parcels of real property in a land dispute case. Emery v Costanzo, No. 327115 (Mich Ct App July 19, 2016). In Emery the trial court granted summary disposition against the defendants' claim of acquiescence. Three days later the plaintiffs and defendants stipulated to dismiss the defendants' counterclaim with prejudice and agreed that the boundaries of the parcels in issue would remain as described in the deeds. The defendants then turned around and attempted to appeal and challenge the trial court's prior dismissal of the acquiescence claim -- notwithstanding the defendants' stipulation. The Court of Appeals rejected this and explained, "defendants may not maintain their position on appeal that the [] order of summary disposition on their counterclaim for acquiescence was improper, since defendants stipulated to the dismissal of their counterclaim."