After being denied zoning variances several times, Oakland 40, LLC (Oakland) brought suit against the City of South Lyon (City) for federal and state taking/inverse condemnation claims, federal and state due process claims, and a state statutory claim based on a Michigan zoning law. The City removed the case to federal court, and has made a motion to dismiss the federal claims for lack of ripeness. Oakland moved for remand of all claims to state court, also on the basis of lack of ripeness. Both parties agree that the takings and due process claims are not ripe because Oakland has not pursued redress of alleged deprivation through available state remedies. As a result the court determined it did not have subject matter jurisdiction and therefore granted Oakland’s motion to remand based on U.S.C. §1447(c). Although the City argued that remand would be futile because Michigan applies the same standard for ripeness, the court rejected this argument, stating that the plain language of 28 U.S.C. §1447 does not provide a futility exception to the remand requirement.
Oakland 40, LLC v City of South Lyon, 2011 WL 1884188 (E.D. Mich. 5/18/2011).
