Careers

Experiences

Industries

Offices

Our Firm

Pages

Our People

Updates

Practices

Home - Warner Norcross + Judd LLP

<p>&lt;p&gt;On Friday, September 11, 2009, the Michigan Supreme Court peremptorily reversed the &lt;a title=&quot;Oneida Twp v. City of Grand Ledge COA Opinion&quot; href=&quot;http://coa.courts.mi.gov/documents/opinions/final/coa/20090212_c277093_30_25o-277093.pdf&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;Court of Appeals&#39; decision &lt;/a&gt;in &lt;em&gt;&lt;a title=&quot;MSC Order reversing COA&quot; href=&quot;http://coa.courts.mi.gov/documents/SCT/PUBLIC/ORDERS/20090911_S138520_38_138520_2009-09-11_or.pdf&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;Oneida Charter Township v. City of Grand Ledge&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/em&gt;.&#39;  In &lt;em&gt;Oneida&lt;/em&gt;, the City of Grand Ledge and the Oneida Charter Township entered into a long-term contract by which the City of Grand Ledge provided water service to some of the residents of the township and charged those residents twice the rate it charged City of Grand Ledge residents.&#39;  Nearly 25 years later, the township sued claiming that under MCL &#39;&#39; 123.141, the City of Grand Ledge cannot charge township residents more than the city&#39;s actual cost of providing the water.&#39;  The township advanced the argument that the statute, read as a whole,&#39; prohibits the City of Grand Ledge from charging township residents more than&#39; its actual cost.&#39; &#39; Grand Ledge responded that the statute explicitly excludes municipalities, like Grand Ledge, that serve less than 1% of the State&#39;s population, and that the actual cost requirement applies only to water department customers, not suppliers.&#39;  The Eaton County Circuit Court agreed with&#39; Grand Ledge and dismissed the township&#39;s case with prejudice.&#39;  The Court of Appeals reversed and adopted the township&#39;s reasoning.&#39;  The Michigan Supreme Court&#39; reinstated the circuit court&#39;s ruling, and explained that the actual-cost requirement in MCL &#39;&#39; 123.141&#39; does not apply to the City of Grand&#39; Ledge.&#39;  Our previous summary of the Court of&#39; Appeals&#39; decision is &lt;a title=&quot;OCJ Post on Oneida Charter Twp v. Grand Ledge&quot; href=&quot;http://www.ocjblog.com/&#39;p=396&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Disclaimer&lt;/em&gt;:&#39;  WNJ represented the prevailing petitioner, City of Grand Ledge, in the Michigan Supreme Court.&lt;/p&gt;</p>

core/freeform

Partner

Matthew T. “Matt” Nelson

MSC Order:  Oneida Charter Township v. City of Grand Ledge

Lorem Ipsum

The Warner Norcross + Judd LLP lawyer responsible for the contents of our advertising and this website is managing partner <a href="/people/mark-j-wassink/" aria-label="Mark Wassink">Mark Wassink</a> who can be reached at <a href="mailto:mwassink@wnj.com" aria-label="email Mark Wassink">mwassink@wnj.com</a> or 616.752.2189. Please read our full <a href="/privacy-policy/" aria-label="see privacy policy">privacy policy</a> available on our website.

MSC Order: Oneida Charter Township v. City of Grand Ledge

professionals