Legal Opinion

City of Essexville v. Carrollton Concrete Mix, Inc

Michigan Court of Appeals

Decided January 22, 2004No. Docket 239807PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMurray, J.

Plaintiff, the city of Essexville, appeals as of right from the final order entered by the trial court in favor of defendant, Carrollton Concrete Mix, Inc. The final order embodied the trial court’s con elusion that the city had engaged in illegal “spot zoning” when, in 1983, it rezoned Carrollton’s property along the Saginaw River from M-l, industrial, to D-l, development district. The city argues on appeal that it had a reasonable basis for the rezoning, that the zoning decision was made pursuant to its master plan, and that its decision was not arbitrary. We agree, in part, and we reverse…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Brae Burn, Inc. v. City of Bloomfield HillsMichigan Supreme Court · 1957
  2. Kropf v. City of Sterling HeightsMichigan Supreme Court · 1974
  3. Dressel v. AmeribankMichigan Supreme Court · 2003
  4. Biske v. City of TroyMichigan Supreme Court · 1969
  5. Delta Charter Twp. v. DinolfoMichigan Supreme Court · 1984

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. K & K Const. Inc. v. DeqMichigan Court of Appeals · 2005
  2. K & K Construction, Inc. v. Department of Environmental QualityMichigan Court of Appeals · 2005
  3. Elliott v. Iowa Department of Public SafetySupreme Court of Iowa · 1985
  4. Whitman v. Galien TownshipMichigan Court of Appeals · 2010
  5. Inverness Mobile Home Community v. Bedford TownshipMichigan Court of Appeals · 2004

4 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