Kofi Johnson v. Motor City Property Managers LLC
331616
| Mich. Ct. App. | Jun 22, 2017Background
- Johnson purchased 22030 Avon (Oak Park) in 2006; the property was repeatedly forfeited to the Oakland County Treasurer for unpaid 2009–2012 taxes and several payment plans were only partially performed.
- Oakland County Treasurer petitioned to foreclose; trial court entered a foreclosure judgment on February 18, 2015, with a 21-day appeal period.
- Johnson filed a pro se complaint to quiet title (Oct. 9, 2015) and alleged due-process violations, fraud, and that foreclosure-related instruments were void.
- Defendants moved for summary disposition, arguing the complaint was an improper collateral attack on the foreclosure judgment and that due process, notice, and fraud claims lacked merit or specificity.
- The trial court granted summary disposition—dismissing the complaint as an improper collateral attack and, alternatively, ruling no genuine factual dispute on due process, fraud, or superior title claims.
- Johnson appealed; the Court of Appeals affirmed, concluding Johnson failed to show the foreclosure judgment was void or that procedural due process or fraud claims survived summary disposition.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Johnson may collaterally attack the foreclosure judgment | Foreclosure judgment is void and thus susceptible to collateral attack | Foreclosure judgment is final; challenge was an improper collateral attack — appeal was required within statutory 21 days | Dismissal affirmed: complaint was an improper collateral attack because judgment was not shown void |
| Whether failure to provide/consider payment plans violated due process | Treasurer ignored payment-plan requests (Jan & Jul 2015) and denied equal access to plans | Payment plans are discretionary; Johnson had prior plans and failed to comply | No due-process violation shown; summary disposition proper |
| Whether notice and service defects deprived Johnson of due process (including failure to send judgment and appellate-rights notice) | Alleged defective proof of service and failure to receive judgment denied appellate notice | Treasurer complied with GPTA notice requirements (first-class, certified mail, posting, publication); no evidence to contradict | Notices satisfied procedural due process; summary disposition proper |
| Whether fraud and PRE/exemption allegations defeat foreclosure | Treasurer misrepresented amounts and failed to apply principal residence exemption (PRE) | Johnson failed to plead fraud with particularity and presented no evidence of applying for PRE or that treasurer mis-assessed | Fraud claim and PRE theory inadequately pleaded and unsupported; summary disposition proper |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Petition by Wayne Co Treasurer for Foreclosure, 478 Mich 1 (due process can render foreclosure judgment void and allow postjudgment relief)
- Jones v. Flowers, 547 US 220 (2006) (due process requires notice reasonably calculated to apprise interested parties)
- Sau-Tuk Indus., Inc. v. Allegan Co., 316 Mich App 122 (standards for de novo review of summary disposition)
- Clay v. Doe, 311 Mich App 359 (MCR 2.116(C)(7) grounds and treatment of well-pleaded allegations)
- Stephens v. Worden Ins. Agency, LLC, 307 Mich App 220 (requirements for pleading fraud with particularity)
- Harbor Watch Condo Ass’n v. Emmett Co Treasurer, 308 Mich App 380 (summary disposition under MCR 2.116(C)(10) when no factual dispute)