Experience, expertise and common sense.

Municipal

Municipal / July 23, 2015

Court/Case No: OAKLAND COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT 13-135842-CZ; COURT OF APPEALS 321414

Tried/Argued Before: Judges

Demand: PLAINTIFFS' DEMAND: Plaintiffs demanded that the City of Oak Park reimburse to them certain fees charged and collected by the 45th District Court on violations issued within their respective jurisdictions in the total amount of $363,718.26, which Plaintiffs asserted they were statutorily entitled to as fines and costs to be allocated under the statutory one-third/two-thirds formula for allocation of revenue collected by a District Court of the third class; Plaintiffs asserted their responsibility to finance the operation of the Court was limited to the amount distributed to Oak Park under this statutory one-third/two-thirds formula for allocation of fine and cost revenue collected. DEFENDANTS' DEMAND: Defendant Oak Park filed a Counter-Complaint for declaratory relief asserting that the Plaintiffs are District Funding Units and are required pursuant to the Revised Judicature Act, MCL 600.8104, MCL 600.8621, and MCL 600.8271, to contribute to the operating expenses of the District Court; that their responsibility to finance the Court was not limited to the amount of fines and costs distributed to Oak Park under the statutory one-third/two-thirds formula for allocation of fine and cost revenue collected by the Court; and that the fees levied by the Court for Court retiree health care and building improvements were not fines and costs subject to distribution under the statutory one-third/two-thirds formula for allocation of fine and cost revenue. Oak Park requested the Court declare the Plaintiffs are District Funding Units responsible to share in the expenses of operating the District Court; order the Plaintiffs to annually allocate funds for the operation of the Court; declare the fees are not subject to distribution to the Plaintiffs as a fine or cost; and to order reimbursement of certain incorrectly distributed fees in FY 2013.

Verdict: The Court of Appeals in an interlocutory appeal, affirmed the order of the Trial Court granting Summary Disposition in favor of the City of Oak Park declaring that all of the municipalities of the 45th Judicial District are District Funding Units responsible for financing the operations of the 45th District Court and that each must annually appropriate funds for the operation of the Court; and that the fees levied by the Court to fund Court retiree health care and building improvements were not fines and costs subject to distribution under the statutory one-third/two-thirds formula for allocation of fine and cost revenue. Oak Park’s request for the Court to order reimbursement of certain incorrectly distributed fees in FY 2013 was not yet ruled on by the Trial Court.

Name of Judge(s): CIRCUIT COURT JUDGE: Honorable Rudy Nichols COURT OF APPEALS PANEL: Honorable Kathleen Jansen, Honorable David H. Sawyer, and Honorable Karen M. Fort Hood

Keys to the Case:

The Revised Judicature Act is a complex legislative enactment that establishes the Judicial System within our State and under which the District operates. The key to the case was Secrest Wardle’s familiarity with the constitutional and statutory enactments establishing judicial districts, the District Court System, and public corporations; and a sound application of the established rules of statutory construction. Appeal Pending: On July 23, 2015, the Plaintiffs filed an Application for Leave to Appeal to the Michigan Supreme Court.

Defense SW attorney(s) Involved in Case: