Bolt v. City of Lansing
Michigan Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the CourtSaad, P.J.
We decide this case on remand from our Supreme Court. Previously, we held that a storm water service charge the city of Lansing imposed on certain property owners was not a tax subject to the requirements of the Headlee Amendment,1 but rather a user fee. Bolt v Lansing, 221 Mich App 79; 561 NW2d 423 (1997). Our Supreme Court reversed and held that the service charge was, in fact, a tax, and that Lansing Ordinance No. 925 was therefore unconstitutional under the Headlee Amendment. 459 Mich *40152; 587 NW2d 264 (1998). We now consider further issues as required by the Supreme Court’s remand.
I. NATURE…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Chevron Oil Co. v. HusonSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Williams v. City of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 1961
- Tebo v. HavlikMichigan Supreme Court · 1984
- City of Cincinnati v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1998
- Bolt v. City of LansingMichigan Supreme Court · 1998
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Solution Source, Inc. v. LPR Associates Ltd. PartnershipMichigan Court of Appeals · 2002
- Jackson County v. City of JacksonMichigan Court of Appeals · 2013
- Adair v. MichiganMichigan Court of Appeals · 2012
- In Re 2002 Pa 48, House of Representatives'requestMichigan Supreme Court · 2002
- Bolt v. City of LansingMichigan Court of Appeals · 2000
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.