United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division
AMENDED OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT'S
MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT  AND GRANTING SUMMARY
JUDGMENT TO PLAINTIFF ON DEFENDANT'S COUNTERCLAIM
STEPHEN J. MURPHY, III United States District Judge.
case concerns the efforts of the City and County of Jackson
to removed blighted homes and the claims of Monika Schwab, a
woman who bought one of those homes. Many of Schwab's
claims have already been resolved. Now before the Court is
the County's motion for summary judgment. The Court held
a hearing and will grant the motion for the reasons stated
Court's previous order laid out most of the underlying
background in the case and need not be repeated here.
See Order 2-8, ECF 44. Only a brief recitation of
the chronology is necessary.
2011, 1045 South Jackson St. (the Property) was subject to a
tax foreclosure and in 2012, title vested in the Jackson
County Treasurer pursuant to the General Property Tax Act
January 2012, the City of Jackson condemned the Property and
a few days later, the City served the County a Notice and
Order. The Notice explained that the home was condemned and
ordered the County not to transfer the property or structure
to another person without first giving notice to the buyer
and filing an "Affidavit of Disclosure." The
affidavit was to confirm "that the new owner has been
advised of and will fully accept and comply with outstanding
code violations." Notice and Order, ECF 28-3.
2012, the Board of Examiners held a hearing on the Notice and
upheld it. The County did not appeal the decision.
August 2012, the County published a notice in the local
newspaper, announcing a public auction of several parcels,
including the Property. After seeing the notice, Schwab
visited the Property and attended the auction on September
27, 2012. She purchased the Property at the auction and
received a quit claim deed from the County Treasurer on
October 25, 2012. The County did not provide notice to Schwab
before her purchase that the City had condemned the building
on the Property.
November of 2012, Schwab sought building permits to make
repairs to the home, but was unsuccessful.
February 2013, the City slated the house on the Property for
demolition and on February 18, 2013, it demolished the house.
judgment is proper if there is "no genuine dispute as to
any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a
matter of law." Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(a). A dispute is genuine
"if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could
return a verdict for the nonmoving party." Anderson
v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248 (1986). A fact
is material if its resolution would establish or refute an
"essential element of a cause of action or defense
asserted by the parties." Kendall v. Hoover
Co., 751 F.2d 171, 174 (6th Cir. 1984).
considering a motion for summary judgment, the Court must
view the facts and draw all inferences in the light most
favorable to the non-moving party. Stiles ex rel. D.S. v.
Grainger Cnty., Tenn., 819 F.3d 834, 848 (6th Cir.
2016). At the summary judgment stage, the judge's
function is not "to weigh the evidence and determine the
truth of the matter but to determine whether there is a
genuine issue for trial." Jackson v. VHS Detroit
Receiving Hosp., Inc., 814 F.3d 769, 775 (6th Cir. 2016)
(quoting Anderson, 477 U.S. at 249). But a mere
"scintilla" of evidence is insufficient to ...