Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Wayne County v. Hathcock

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided July 30, 2004No. Docket 124070-124078Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partWeaver, J.

I concur with the majority’s result and decision to overrule Poletown Neighborhood Council v Detroit, 410 Mich 616; 304 NW2d 455 (1981), but do so for my own reasons.1

The Michigan Constitution states:

Private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation therefor being first made and *486secured in a manner prescribed by law .... [Const 1963, art 10, § 2.]

Proper application of the art 10, § 2’s “public use” limitation on the exercise of eminent domain requires that the Court abandon Poletown’s holding that land can be taken by the government and transferred to a private…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Traverse City School Dist. v. Atty. Gen.Michigan Supreme Court · 1971
  2. Peterman v. Department of Natural ResourcesMichigan Supreme Court · 1994
  3. Phillips v. Mirac, IncMichigan Supreme Court · 2004
  4. Poletown Neighborhood Council v. City of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 1981
  5. Regents of the University of Michigan v. StateMichigan Supreme Court · 1975

19 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