|
No. 124070-78
| County of Wayne , |
|
Mark J. Zausmer (248) 851-4111 |
| Plaintiff-Appellee, |
|
|
vs (Appeal from Ct of Appeals) |
|
|
| (Wayne - Sapala. M.) |
|
Alan T. Ackerman
(248) 537-1155 |
| Edward Hathcock, et al, |
|
Mary Massaron Ross
(313) 983-4801 |
| Aaron T. Speck and Donald E. Speck, |
|
Martin N. Fealk
(313) 381-9000 |
Defendants-Appellants. |
|
|
| ______________________________________ |
|
|
Click to view briefs in Adobe format:
Plaintiff-Appellee's Brief on Appeal>>
Defendants-Appellants' Brief on Appeal>>
Defendants-Appellants' Reply Brief>>
Adell Childrens Funded Trusts Amici Curiae Brief>>
City of Dearborn's Amicus Curiae Brief>>
City of Detroit's Amicus Curiae Brief>>
Economic Development Corporation of the City of Detroit, City of Detroit
Downtown Development Authority and the Michigan Downtown
and Financing Association's Amicus Curiae Brief>>
Institute for Justice and Mackinac Center for Public Policy's Amicus Curiae Brief>>
International Council of Shopping Centers, Inc.'s Amicus Curiae Brief>>
Michigan Departments of Environmental Quality and Labor and
Economic Growth's Amicus Curiae Brief>>
Michigan Economic Development Corporation's Amicus Curiae Brief>>
Michigan Municipal League's Amicus Curiae Brief>>
National Congress for Community Economic Development Amicus Curiae Brief>>
Pacific Legal Foundation and ACLU Fund of Michigan's Amicus Curiae Brief>>
Public Corporation Law Section of the State Bar of Michigan's Amicus Curiae Brief>>
Ronald
Reosti, Ralph Nader and Alan Hirsch's Amicus Curiae Brief>>
Background
Wayne County is assembling a large tract of land, about 1,300 acres, near Detroit Metropolitan Airport for the purpose of developing a major commercial, industrial and hotel project. The county hopes the project will create thousands of jobs and yield millions of dollars in tax revenue. The county has obtained all but about 2 percent of the land it seeks. These cases involve the nine land owners who own the remaining 2 percent and do not wish to sell to the county. The land owners argued that taking their land would not be for a public purpose, partly because the property would later be sold to private entities. The Wayne County Circuit Court ruled in favor of the county, relying on Poletown Neighborhood Council v Detroit, 410 Mich 616 (1981), a case decided more than 20 years ago that allowed Detroit to take land to be used for an automobile manufacturing plant. The Court of Appeals agreed with the circuit court, but two Court of Appeals judges questioned the Poletown decision. The defendants appeal. The Supreme Court will consider, among other things, whether these cases involve takings for a public purpose. If so, the land owners can be forced to sell their land to the county for just compensation. In deciding these cases, the Supreme Court will have an opportunity to reconsider the issues decided in Poletown.
Top of Page
|
