The Michigan Court of Appeals held in Edgewood Holdings v. County of Otsego, No. 17-016819-CH (October 2018), that all administrative remedies must be exhausted before taking claim is ripe for judicial review.
Plaintiff owned property in Otsego Township, Michigan within the R-1 District, which is designated for one- and two-family dwelling sites and residential related uses. Related uses include dwellings, parks, cemeteries, and personal storage structures. Plaintiff requested a permit from the county zoning board of appeals requesting that it be allowed to place some self-storage, pole-barn structures on their land that would be rented out commercially. After a public hearing, the zoning board denied their request and provided plaintiff with two options going forward: (1) request to have the property rezoned or (2) request an amendment of the text of the R-1 District to allow such use. Plaintiff did not pursue either option and, instead, filed a complaint in circuit court alleging a confiscatory taking and violation of due process.
The trial court, dismissing the complaint, held that the issues were not ripe for review because plaintiff did not exhaust all of their administrative remedies. The Court of Appeals affirmed. The plaintiff argued that their complaint was a “facial challenge” to the constitutionality of the statute and therefore had no finality requirement. However, the trial court disagreed and noted several “as-applied challenges” in plaintiff’s complaint. The Court of Appeals did note that plaintiff was able to amend their complaint in order to remedy the issues detailed by the trial court. Furthermore, both the trial court and Court of Appeals noted that “plaintiff would be entitled to bring the above claims and/or any additional claims available again in the future.”
The opinion can be found at the link below:
https://law.justia.com/cases/michigan/court-of-appeals-unpublished/2018/
This article was written by Ryan Hansen, Law Clerk
