Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Coloma Charter Township v. Berrien County

Michigan Court of Appeals

Decided September 6, 2016No. Docket 325226 and 325335Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partMarkey, J.

These consolidated appeals concern whether the county’s authority to “site” and “erect” buildings pursuant to the county commissioners act (CCA), MCL 46.1 et seq., see MCL 46.11(b) and (d), has priority over the zoning ordinance of the Charter Township of Coloma (the township). I respectfully dissent in part from the majority opinion. Despite *137recognizing that Berrien County constructed a new building—the clear and only purpose of which is the indoor discharging of firearms—the majority concludes that these cases are controlled by the holding of Herman v Berrien Co, 481 Mich 352; 750 NW2d 570…

2Cases cited35 opinions

  1. Maiden v. RozwoodMichigan Supreme Court · 1999
  2. Sun Valley Foods Co. v. WardMichigan Supreme Court · 1999
  3. Odom v. Wayne CountyMichigan Supreme Court · 2008
  4. Johnson v. ReccaMichigan Supreme Court · 2012
  5. Corley v. Detroit Board of EducationMichigan Supreme Court · 2004

30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API