Department of Environmental Quality v. Morley
314 Mich. App. 306
| Mich. Ct. App. | 2015Background
- DEQ sued Morley for dredging, filling, draining, and maintaining uses on a wetland in 2009 under Part 303 NREPA, seeking an injunction and civil fines.
- Bench trial held; court found 92.3 acres of Morley’s 106.5-acre property were wetland and violated Part 303.
- Court ordered removal of 4.1 acres of fill, restoration, cessation of Part 303 violations (including farming on wetland), and a $30,000 civil fine.
- Morley demanded a jury trial; the trial court struck the demand and Morley appealed.
- Court held no historical right to jury trial for equitable, regulatory wetland actions under Part 303; Michigan law governs entitlement to jury trial in this action.
- Part 303 creates a remedial scheme with civil penalties and injunctive relief, not a criminal or common-law tort action.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Entitlement to jury trial for Part 303 action | DEQ lacked jury right; relief is equitable | Morley had constitutional right to jury trial | No right to jury trial; equitable relief under Part 303 does not require a jury. |
| Admission of wetland delineation testimony | Expert testimony established wetland extent | Foundation for delineation was lacking | No reversible error; testimony based on reliable methods and sufficient data. |
| Admissibility of Exhibits 11–12 (hearsay) | Exhibits used for non-hearsay purposes | Hearsay without proper testimonial foundation | Not plain error; exhibits not offered for truth of matter asserted. |
| Exhibits 33–37 for wetland characterization | Exhibits aided wetland determination | Exhibits were unreliable or unhelpful | Exhibits properly admitted under MRE 702; no abuse of discretion. |
| Whether the injunction effected a taking | Regulation burdens property; no compensable taking shown | Injunction and wetlands designation reduced value | Not a taking; regulations universal; Morley had notice and economic viability preserved. |
Key Cases Cited
- Conservation Dept. v Brown, 335 Mich 343 (1952) (right to jury trial preserved for pre- Constitution cases; no right for equitable actions created after Constitution.)
- Gelman Sciences, Inc. v Fireman’s Fund Ins Co, 183 Mich App 445 (1990) (no historical right to jury trial where relief is equitable.)
- Wolfenden v Burke, 69 Mich App 394 (1976) (no constitutional guarantee of jury trial where relief is equitable.)
- Tull v United States, 481 US 412 (1987) (CWA jury-trial right not applicable to state Part 303 actions.)
- McKinstry v City of Chicago, 561 US 742 (2010) (federal constitution does not confer right to jury trial in state civil cases.)
- Hardware Dealers’ Mut Fire Ins Co of Wis v Glidden Co, 284 US 151 (1931) (Fourteenth Amendment does not require jury trials in all state procedures.)
- Bevan v Brandon Twp, 438 Mich 385 (1991) (takings and regulatory burdens analyzed for reasonableness of expectations.)
- K & K Constr, Inc v Dep’t of Environmental Quality, 267 Mich App 523 (2005) (wetland regulation does not automatically amount to a taking.)
- Bond v Dep’t of Natural Resources, 183 Mich App 225 (1989) (permit requirements and wetland designation do not per se take property.)
- Schmude Oil, Inc v Dep’t of Environmental Quality, 306 Mich App 35 (2014) (investment-backed expectations under Part 303.)
- Madugula v Taub, 853 NW2d 75 (2014) (damages remedy does not require jury trial in certain statutory actions.)