Richards v. City of Pontiac
| Decision Date | 07 June 1943 |
| Docket Number | No. 25.,25. |
| Parties | RICHARDS et al. v. CITY OF PONTIAC et al. |
| Court | Michigan Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Suit in chancery by LeRoy Richards and another against the City of Pontiac, a municipal corporation, and another, for an injunction restraining the city from enforcing the provisions of the city's tourist camp ordinance so as to interfere with plaintiffs' trailer camp, in which suit defendant city, by cross-bill, seeks to restrain plaintiffs from using their property as a trailer camp and from renting trailers and substandard houses. Decree for plaintiffs, and defendants appeal.
Affirmed.Appeal from Circuit Court, Oakland County, in Chancery; H. Russel Holland, Judge.
Before the Entire Bench.
William A. Ewart, of Pontiac, for appellants.
Clarence L. Smith, of Pontiac, for appellees.
This is a suit in chancery for an injunction restraining the city of pontiac from enforcing the provisions of the city's Tourist Camp Ordinance No. 978.
Plaintiffs are the owners of the Richards Trailer Park. It is located on a two acre parcel of ground facing Telegraph road. The park is flanked on the south and east by an undeveloped city park and on the north by vacant acreage. In 1937, LeRoy Richards, one of the plaintiffs, conducted a trailer sales agency on a portion of the premises here involved. In April 1938, plaintiffs purchased the premises here involved for the purpose of continuing their sales agency and operating a trailer coach park for hire. In December 1938, the city of Pontiac adopted a zoning ordinance by which the Richards' property came within the zone designated as residential property. In October 1940, the above zoning ordinance was amended and the classification of the area in which plaintiffs' property is located was changed from residential to commercial.
In 1941, plaintiffs received a certificate from the building department of the city of Pontiac authorizing the erection of a building on the property for laundry and toilets for trailer camp.
In March 1941, the city of Pontiac adopted the city Tourist Camp Ordinance, the following sections of which are involved in the present controversy:
‘No license shall be granted for a tourist camp except in Manufacturing 1, 2 and 3, as provided by the City Building Zone Ordinance No. 944 and the said districts, Manufacturing 1, 2 and 3, are hereby designated by the City of Pontiac as the places where tourist camps may be licensed to operate.
In September 1941, plaintiffs filed a bill of complaint in the circuit court of Oakland county for the purpose of enjoining the city of Pontiac from interfering in any way with their trailer camp under the provisions of the trailer camp ordinance. The director of public health of the city of Pontiac by cross-bill seeks to have plaintiffs restrained from using their property as a trailer camp and from renting trailers and sub-standard houses.
The trial court found that the Tourist Camp Ordinance No. 978 was repugnant to Act No. 255, Pub.Acts 1941, and granted a permanent injunction against interference with plaintiffs by virtue of any authority contained in the ordinance. He also found that the trailer park had been established and so used prior to the adoption of the zoning ordinance and amendment and held that plaintiffs' rights had become vested and could not be disturbed.
Defendants appeal and contend that Act No. 303, Pub.Acts 1939 (Comp.Laws Supp. 1940, § 2487 et seq.), expressly authorizes the city to make such regulations as are contained in the Tourist Camp Ordinance; that this authority has not been modified by Act No. 255, Pub.Acts 1941; and that the zoning ordinance prohibits the existence of the trailer park in its present location.
In 1917, the legislature enacted Act No. 167, Pub.Acts 1917. This act is known as the Housing Law of Michigan. Its purpose was to promote the health, safety and welfare of the people by the regulation of building requirements, alterations, and improvements in dwellings in cities with a population of 10,000 or more. We take judicial notice of the fact that when this law was enacted, the problems arising out of trailer camps were not a matter requiring legislation and it was not intended that the above act would apply to the construction of trailers and trailer camps.
In 1939, the legislature enacted Act No. 143. The purpose of this act was to regulate trailers and trailer camps within the corporate limits of townships in the State of Michigan.
At the same session of the legislature, Act No. 303, Pub.Acts 1939, was enacted. This act amended Act No. 167, Pub.Acts 1917. Among its provisions was a proviso (§ 2(1) that house trailers ‘when located in a park or place designated or licensed for the purpose by the corporate community’ were excepted from the provisions of ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Llewellyn
...Palmer v. Superior Twp., 60 Mich.App. 664, 677 et seq., 233 N.W.2d 14 (1975) (zoning ordinance upheld); contra Richards v. Pontiac, 305 Mich. 666, 9 N.W.2d 885 (1943) (zoning ordinance was struck down, but its holding was modified in Loose, supra, and Bane, supra, to uphold the ordinances i......
-
State ex rel. City of Minot v. Gronna
...Utilities Co., 363 Ill. 89, 1 N.E.2d 392, 394; Pipoly v. Benson, 20 Cal.2d 366, 125 P.2d 482, 147 A.L.R. 515; Richards v. City of Pontiac, 305 Mich. 666, 9 N.W.2d 885; Ex Parte Loving, 178 Mo. 194, 77 S.W. 508; 2 McQuillin, Municipal Corporations, 3rd ed., Sec. 4.05, pp. 18-19. By said Chap......
-
Hoffmann v. Kinealy
...Adjustment, Mo.App., 307 S.W.2d 730, 732; Des Jardin v. Town of Greenfield, 262 Wis. 43, 53 N.W.2d 784, 787(1); Richards v. City of Pontiac, 305 Mich. 666, 9 N.W.2d 885, 888(7). ...
-
Gackler Land Co., Inc. v. Yankee Springs Tp.
...spaces for trailers was readily apparent. See Patchak v. Lansing Twp., 361 Mich. 489, 105 N.W.2d 406 (1960); Richards v. City of Pontiac, 305 Mich. 666, 9 N.W.2d 885 (1943); Co. Bd. of Comm'rs v. Petsch, 172 Neb. 263, 268, 109 N.W.2d 388 (1961); Blundell v. West Helena, 258 Ark. 123, 131, 5......