Legal Opinion
Smookler v. Wheatfield Township
Michigan Supreme Court
Decided August 19, 1975No. 54936, (Calendar No. 11)PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtLevin, J.
We affirm the Court of Appeals for the reasons stated in our opinion in Sabo v Monroe Twp, ante, 394 Mich 531; 232 NW2d 584 (1975).
T. G. Kavanagh, C. J., and J. W. Fitzgerald, J., concurred with Levin, J. Williams, J.
This zoning appeal invites this Court to once again confront a facet of exclusionary zoning, this time the creation of a zoning classification without attaching it to any specific land. Such a zoning ordinance is, of course, invalid on its face, and this causes us to invalidate the zoning ordinance of the defendant township as exclusionary. 1
I —Facts
Plaintiffs purchased the…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- National Land & Investment Co. v. Easttown Township Board of AdjustmentSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1965
- Brae Burn, Inc. v. City of Bloomfield HillsMichigan Supreme Court · 1957
- Kropf v. City of Sterling HeightsMichigan Supreme Court · 1974
- Gust v. Township of CantonMichigan Supreme Court · 1955
- Bristow v. City of WoodhavenMichigan Court of Appeals · 1971
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Kirk v. Tyrone TownshipMichigan Supreme Court · 1976
- Ed Zaagman, Inc. v. City of KentwoodMichigan Supreme Court · 1979
- Sabo v. Monroe TownshipMichigan Supreme Court · 1975
- Jamens v. Avon TownshipMichigan Court of Appeals · 1976
- Werkhoven v. City of GrandvilleMichigan Court of Appeals · 1975
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.