Edwards v. Meisner
2:19-cv-10047
E.D. Mich.Dec 18, 2019Background
- Plaintiff John D. Edwards owned 25055 W. Ten Mile Rd., Southfield, MI; property was foreclosed in a county tax sale (transferred to Oakland County Treasurer Feb 2016) and later sold to the City of Southfield (July 7, 2016) for ~$13,614; plaintiff claims the property was worth ~$150,000 and seeks the surplus equity.
- Edwards previously litigated in Michigan state court (challenge to foreclosure) and lost; Michigan Court of Appeals affirmed and Michigan Supreme Court denied leave; Edwards later filed federal suits (2018 and 2019) asserting takings, excessive fines, equal protection, due process and related claims.
- In an earlier 2018 ED Mich. case Judge Borman dismissed Edwards’s federal complaint on Rooker–Feldman and Tax Injunction Act/comity grounds; dismissal was without prejudice.
- The May 9, 2019 amended federal complaint alleges federal constitutional claims (Fifth/Eighth/Fourteenth Amendments) seeking return of surplus equity rather than reversal of foreclosure; numerous defendants include Oakland County, City of Southfield, SNPHC/SNRI and Habitat for Humanity (HFH).
- Several motions to dismiss are pending. Magistrate Judge Patti recommends: deny without prejudice the County/City/SNPHC/SNRI motions to dismiss and administratively stay the case as to those defendants pending the Michigan Supreme Court’s decision in Rafaeli; grant HFH’s motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim.
- The magistrate relied on evolving precedent (Rafaeli state proceedings; Wayside/Freed litigation; and the U.S. Supreme Court’s Knick decision) and found the moving defendants did not adequately brief the controlling, unsettled authority.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jurisdiction / Ripeness of takings claim | Edwards seeks just compensation/return of equity, not reversal of foreclosure; thus federal takings claim is ripe | Defendants contend ripeness/state-litigation (Williamson County) and Tax Injunction Act bar federal jurisdiction | Magistrate declined to resolve now: deny motions without prejudice and stay pending Rafaeli and related appellate rulings because law is in flux |
| Rooker–Feldman (challenge to state-court judgments) | Edwards says he does not seek to overturn state-court foreclosure order; seeks monetary relief for constitutional violations | Defendants assert Edwards is a state-court loser and his claims are barred by Rooker–Feldman | Magistrate found plaintiff’s framing (seeking equity return) distinguishes Rooker–Feldman but did not finally decide; stayed/denied motions to allow developments in controlling law |
| Sufficiency of pleadings as to Habitat for Humanity (HFH) | Edwards alleges conflicts of interest, nonprofit abuse, profit-sharing and requests quo warranto/remedies | HFH says it never held title/interest in the property and plaintiff alleges no cognizable federal claim (no private cause of action under §501(c)(3)) | Magistrate granted HFH’s motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6) |
| Whether to decide current motions now given evolving precedents | Edwards points to pending Rafaeli and recent Knick decision undermining older ripeness doctrine; urges delay | Defendants moved to dismiss but did not adequately brief Rafaeli/Knick/Freed implications | Magistrate concluded inefficient to decide now; denied without prejudice and administratively stayed the case as to County/City/SNPHC/SNRI defendants |
Key Cases Cited
- Knick v. Township of Scott, 139 S. Ct. 2162 (2019) (overruled Williamson County’s state-litigation requirement; property owner may bring §1983 takings claim in federal court at time of taking)
- Wayside Church v. Van Buren Cty., 847 F.3d 812 (6th Cir. 2017) (Sixth Circuit addressed ripeness and jurisdiction for GPTA surplus-equity claims; remanded/dismissed on jurisdictional grounds pre-Knick)
- Williamson County Reg'l Planning Comm'n v. Hamilton Bank, 473 U.S. 172 (1985) (established state-litigation ripeness requirement for federal takings claims prior to Knick)
- Lance v. Dennis, 546 U.S. 459 (2006) (explained Rooker–Feldman bars lower federal courts from reviewing final state-court judgments)
- Lumbard v. City of Ann Arbor, 913 F.3d 585 (6th Cir. 2019) (discussed federal courts’ obligation to exercise jurisdiction over takings claims and related jurisprudential tensions)
- Hammoud v. County of Wayne, [citation="697 F. App'x 445"] (6th Cir. 2017) (affirmed dismissal where federal takings claims were deemed premature absent state inverse-condemnation remedies)