People v. Scrafano

• Decision Date: 29 December 1943
• Docket Number: No. 94.,94.
• Citation: 307 Mich. 655,12 N.W.2d 325
• Parties: PEOPLE v. SCRAFANO.
• Court: Michigan Supreme Court

307 Mich. 655

12 N.W.2d 325

PEOPLE

v.SCRAFANO.

No. 94.

Supreme Court of Michigan.

Dec. 29, 1943.

Tony Scrafano was convicted of violating a city zoning ordinance by storing commercial trucks used in connection with his wholesale fruit and produce business in a garage on his residence property in a residence district. His petition to the Circuit Court for a writ of certiorari to review the judgment was denied, and he appeals.

Affirmed.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Wayne County; Joseph A. Moynihan, judge.

Before the Entire Bench.

Lewis & Watkins, of Detroit (Frederick W. Seitz, of Detroit, of counsel), for appellant.

Paul E. Krause, Corp. Counsel, and Nathaniel H. Goldstick and Arthur L. Barkey, Asst. Corp. Counsels, all of Detroit, for appellee.

SHARPE, Justice.

Defendant, Tony Scrafano, was complainted against in the recorder's court, traffic and ordinance division, of the city of Detroit, Michigan, and was charged with having violated section 5.1 of OrdinanceNo. 171-D (zoning ordinance) of the Compiled Ordinances of Detroit of 1936, as amended.

The pertinent provisions of section 5.1 of the ordinance read as follows:

‘Section 5. R-1 Districts

‘The following regulations shall apply in all R-1 Districts:

‘Sec. 5.1. Uses Permitted

‘No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered, or used, or premises used, in whole or in part, for other than one or more of the following specified uses:

‘1. One family dwellings. * * *

‘9. Uses accessory to any of the above when located on the same lot and not involving any business, profession, trade or occupation.’

Defendant purchased a lot at the corner of Wilshire street and Dickerson avenue in Detroit and, after the effective date of the zoning ordinance, erected a brick veneer single residence for his home and a three-car brick and masonry garage approximately 35 feet square and 16 feet high, at the rear of his lot. Defendant is engaged in the wholesale fruit and produce business. He owns two commercial motor vehicles which he uses in connection with his business. He conducts his business by obtaining merchandise at the Detroit Union Produce Terminal which is on the opposite side of the city from his residence, and distributes his merchandise to individual grocers who are his customers. He does not transact any of his business at his home or at the garage in question.

It appears that on one or more days between November 18 and November 23, 1942, the defendant, who had been parking his trucks on the street or at a nearby gasoline station overnight, ran his two trucks into his garage in order to keep certain perishable fruit and vegetables from freezing.

On February 5, 1943, the defendant was found guilty of the charge of violating the above mentioned ordinance. On February 18, 1943, the defendant petitioned the circuit court of Wayne county for a writ of certiorari to review the judgment of the recorder's court, traffic and ordinance division. The petition was heard and denied. On June 8, 1943, we granted defendant's application for leave to appeal.

Defendant urges that there is no such reasonable relation between the city's attempt to prevent anyone in a residential district from housing a commercial vehicle in his private garage and the legitimate public purpose sought to be accomplished by the zoning ordinance; that the action of the city of Detroit in this case is based upon an improper, unreasonable and invalid interpretation of section 5.1 of the ordinance; or, that if the ordinance is properly interpreted by the city of Detroit, then it...