Case ID: mich-app_16/html/0616-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

BIHLMIRE v. LAKE TOWNSHIP
    Zoning — Violation of Zoning Ordinance — Nuisance—Equity—Injunctive Relief.
    Operation of a trailer park in violation of a township zoning ordinance constitutes a nuisance per se which may he enjoined in an aetion hy the township (CL 1948, § 125.294).
    Appeal from Berrien, Karl F. Ziek, J.
    Submitted Division 3 March 4, 1969, at Grand Rapids.
    (Docket No. 3,665.)
    Decided March 27, 1969.
    Complaint by William D. Bihlmire against Lake Township, the Lake Township board, the Lake Township zoning board, and the Lake Township board of zoning appeals for an injunction barring defendants’ interference with plaintiff’s operation of a trailer park. Defendants counterclaim for an injunction against the operation of the trailer park. Injunction granted to defendants. Plaintiff appeals.
    Affirmed.
    References for Points in Headnote
    39 Am Jur, Nuisance § 115; 58 Am Jur, Zoning §§ 63, 188-190.
    Maintenance or regulation by public authorities of tourist or trailer camps, motor courts, or motels. 22 ALR2d 774.
    Tourist or trailer camp, motor court or motel as nuisance. 24 ALR 2d 571.
    Use of trailer or similar structure for residence purposes as within limitation of restrictive covenant, zoning provision, or building regulation, 96 ALR2d 232,
    
      
      Ryan, McQuillan & Vander Ploeg (Tat Parish, of counsel), for plaintiff.
    
      Killian, Spelman & Taglia, for defendants.
    BEFORE: Quinn, P. J., and Holbrook and T. M. Burns, JJ.
   Per Curiam.

The trial court granted defendants an injunctive judgment on their counterclaim and plaintiff appeals on the sole ground that defendants lacked standing to seek the relief granted.

The trial court found that plaintiff’s operation of a-trailer park violated the township zoning ordinance and this finding is not appealed. Such operation constitutes a nuisance per se. CL 1948, § 125.294 (Stat Ann 1958 Rev § 5.2963[24]).' Such a nuisance may be enjoined at the suit of a township. Fredal v. Forster (1967), 9 Mich App 215.

Affirmed with costs to defendants.