United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Northern Division
ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO SUPPLEMENT ITS COMPLAINT
AND AMENDING THE SCHEDULING ORDER
L. LUDINGTON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
October 4, 2018, Plaintiff Autumn Acres Senior Village, Inc.
(“Autumn Acres”) filed a Complaint against
Defendants Village of Mayville (the “Village”)
and Barbara Valentine. ECF No. 1 at PageID.1. On December 20,
2018, Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint, identifying four
causes of action against Mayville. ECF No. 9 at PageID.52.
Count I alleges that Mayville engaged in an illegal taking
when it refused to provide Plaintiff with a municipal water
connection. Count II contends that the Village's refusal
to provide a water connection deprived Autumn Acres of its
constitutionally protected rights of due process.
Id. at PageID.71. Count III asserts that Mayville
violated Autumn Acres' federal and state equal protection
rights by treating Autumn Acres differently than other
developers. Id. at PageID.73. Count IV claims that
Mayville made false and defamatory statements regarding
Autumn Acres' illicit extension of the water main.
Id. at PageID.74-75.
prior state court proceedings occurred relating to the
allegations made in Plaintiff's complaint. The first was
filed on May 12, 2014 and heard in 71-B District Court in
second was filed on November 16, 2015 in the 54th Circuit
Court for Tuscola County. The parties appealed the 54th
Circuit Court decision.
the appeal of the state court proceeding was pending,
Defendant filed a Motion to Dismiss this case on June 5,
2019. ECF No. 17 at PageID.129. Plaintiff filed its response
to the Motion to Dismiss on June 24, 2019. ECF No. 19 at
PageID.225. Though permitted to file a reply pursuant to
Local Rule 7.1(e)(C), Defendants did not do so.
October 30, 2019, the parties were directed to file
supplemental briefing to provide additional factual
information. ECF No. 21. On November 19, 2019, the Michigan
Court of Appeals entered its order, affirming the decision of
the 54th Circuit Court. The next day, the parties submitted
their supplemental briefing to this Court.
property at issue (the “Property”) consists of
approximately 12 acres. ECF No. 23-2 at PageID.498. Plaintiff
purchased the Property in 2000 for approximately $54, 000
with the intent to develop the Property into a senior village
for individuals 55 years of age and older. Id. The
Property did not have municipal water service at the time of
Property is a drive formerly owned by Plaintiff called
“Roller Way.” It runs north-south and is
perpendicular to “Main Street.” In 2003,
Plaintiff dedicated it as a right of way to the Village the
first 140 feet of Roller Way running from Main Street, making
those 140 feet a public road. Id. at PageID.503.
structures exist on the Property that are relevant to this
case. The attached diagram demonstrates the approximate
location of the structures and their relation to each other.
See Exhibit A. In 2003, Plaintiff constructed a
duplex near the southern border of the Property (“320
and 325 Roller Way”). ECF No. 23-2 at PageID.500. In
2006 and 2007, Plaintiff constructed another duplex north of
320 and 325 Roller Way (“324A and 324B Roller
Way”). Id. at PageID.501. The home of
Plaintiff's principal, Clare Roller, is located Northwest
of 324A and 324B Roller Way (“330 Roller Way”).
In 2013, Plaintiff installed two mobile homes east of 324A
and 324B (“325 and 327 Roller Way”).
2006, Roger Sweet was employed with the Village's
Department of Public Works (“DPW”) as the DPW
Supervisor. According to Roller, Sweet told him that the
Village would provide the Property with municipal water via a
water main. The water main would run north from the Main
Street water main along Roller Way.
to Roller, he and Sweet measured the entirety of the proposed
water main and determined that it would need to be
approximately 360 feet in length. Id. at PageID.503.
Sweet told Roller that the Village would pay for the first
140 feet of the water line (“First Extension”)
because the Village owned the first 140 feet of Roller Way.
Plaintiff would be responsible for paying for the remaining
220 feet in length (“Second Extension). Id. at
PageID.504. In 2007, a contractor, Henry Bollon, installed
the 360-foot water main. The village later billed Plaintiff
for 200 feet of water main materials. See ECF No.
2011, Bollon extended the water main to 330 Roller Way
(“Third Extension”). Roller claims that Sweet
approved the Third Extension. ECF No. 23-2 at PageID.506.
2013, Roller installed his two mobile homes, 325 and 327
Roller Way. ECF No. 23-2 at PageID.507. He claims that
earlier that year, the Village had agreed to provide 325 and
327 Roller Way access to municipal water for $1, 800.
See ECF No. 19-2 at PageID.257; ECF No. 23-8 at
PageID.553. To accomplish this, the Village constructed a
water meter pit south of 325 Roller Way. ECF No. 19-2 at
PageID.264. The pit soon flooded with groundwater.
Id. Regardless, the Village sent Roller an invoice
totaling more than $3, 000 for the construction of the pit,
notwithstanding the estimate for $1, 800. ECF No. 23-4 at
then installed a water line from 330 Roller Way to the meter
pit (“Fourth Extension”). ECF No. 23-2 at
PageID.508. He later ran a water line from the meter pit to
325 and 327 Roller Way (“Fifth Extension”).
Roller claims that he received approval to construct the