Legal Opinion

Anspaugh v. Imlay Township

Michigan Court of Appeals

Decided March 14, 2007No. Docket 262492PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Per curiam

Plaintiffs appeal as of right the trial court’s order denying plaintiffs’ motion for partial summary disposition and granting summary disposition in favor of defendants pursuant to MCR 2.116(I)(2). We reverse and remand.

I. BASIC FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

In June 2000, plaintiffs applied to rezone property located along Newark Road in defendant Imlay Township from R-l residential to 1-2 heavy industrial. During the various meetings regarding rezoning of this property, defendants acknowledged that 1-2 land uses were permissible under the township’s zoning ordinance, but no land designated for…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Maiden v. RozwoodMichigan Supreme Court · 1999
  2. Maldonado v. Ford Motor Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 2006
  3. Alken-Ziegler, Inc. v. Waterbury Headers Corp.Michigan Supreme Court · 1999
  4. Banta v. SerbanMichigan Supreme Court · 1963
  5. Smookler v. Wheatfield TownshipMichigan Supreme Court · 1975

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Anspaugh v. IMLAY TOWNSHIPMichigan Supreme Court · 2007
  2. James Dale Schmidt v. Ashley Denise EftCourt of Appeals of Iowa · 2016

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

Powered by the Exa API