Case Name: WARREN CONSOLIDATED SCHOOLS v. FROLING
Court: Michigan Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Michigan
Decision Date: 1970-10-28
Citations: 27 Mich. App. 452
Docket Number: Docket No. 7,043
Parties: WARREN CONSOLIDATED SCHOOLS v. FROLING
Judges: Before: T. M. Burns, P. J., and Holbrook and Bronson, JJ.
Reporter: Michigan appeals reports; cases decided in the Michigan Court of Appeals.
Volume: 27
Pages: 452–459

Head Matter:
WARREN CONSOLIDATED SCHOOLS v. FROLING
Opinion of the Court
1. Eminent Domain — School Boards.
School board proceeded properly in exercising power of eminent domain under the state agencies act rather than the School Code of 1955, notwithstanding that it would not have to make a good faith offer to purchase prior to condemnation under the state agencies act (MCLA §§ 213.21 et seq., 340.711).
2. Trial — Instructions to Jury — Objections—Timely Raised.
Objections to jury instructions at trial are waived if not timely raised (GCR 1963, 516.2).
3. Eminent Domain — Necessity—Expansion Purposes — Competent Evidence — Appeal and Error.
Jury’s finding of necessity for expropriating land for expansion purposes of a school will not be disturbed on appeal when competent evidence regarding the necessity for a condemnation was offered.
Concurring Opinion
Holbrook, J.
4. Eminent Domain — Damages—Just Compensation.
A jury was required to award defendants “such compensation therefor as it shall deem just” and it was not mandatory that the jury find damages to the remaining parcels of the defendants when the final awards were in total sums for both the land acquired by condemnation and the land remaining (UCLA § 213.30).
References for Points in Headnotes
[1, 3] 26 Am Jur 2d, Eminent Domain §§ 61, 74, 103, 105, 121, 139.
[2] 53 Am Jur, Trial §§ 824-835.
[4] 26 Am Jur 2d, Eminent Domain §§ 6, 150-159, 170-173.
27 Am Jur 2d, Eminent Domain §§ 247, 266, 279, 375-377, 406, 478.
Appeal from Macomb, George R. Deneweth, J.
Submitted Division 2 March 9, 1970, at Detroit.
(Docket No. 7,043.)
Decided October 28, 1970.
Leave to appeal denied February 9 and March 19, 1971.
384 Mich 802, 819, 820.
Petition by Warren Consolidated Schools Board of Education against William P. Froling and Helen Walker for acquisition by condemnation of private property. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant appeals.
Affirmed.
Charles H. Earl, for plaintiff.
Dickinson, Wright, McKean & Cudlip (Charles R. Moon, John E. S. Scott and John H. Yoe, of counsel), for defendant.
Before: T. M. Burns, P. J., and Holbrook and Bronson, JJ.

Opinion:
Bronson, J.
The Warren Consolidated Schools Board of Education by resolution determined that there was a need to take land for the erection of a new school. The school board authorized its attorney to commence proceedings in accordance with its resolution. On May 5, 1967, the school board commenced suit.
At a trial before a jury in Macomb County Circuit Court, petitioner was awarded a parcel of property. The price to be paid by way of compensation for the taking was determined at $7,500 per acre. Respondent appeals that decision and the denial of his motion for a new trial.
Respondent contends that the school board should have proceeded under MCLA § 340.711 (Stat Ann 1968 Rev § 15.3711), known as the School Code of 1955. Petitioner argues that, while the School Code of 1955 could have been followed, petitioner had a valid alternative and did in fact so act under MCLA § 213.21 et seq. (Stat Ann 1958 Rev § 8.11 et seq.), the state agencies act. This issue is crucial, for under the state agencies act there is no requirement that a good faith offer to purchase he made prior to condemnation. In the instant case no such offer was in fact made by the school board.
We find that petitioner could properly proceed under the state agencies act. See Union School District of the City of Jackson v. Starr Commonwealth for Boys (1948), 322 Mich 165.
At trial, the verdict roll was presented to the jury in the form prepared by petitioner's attorney. The form of verdict submitted to the jury required them to assess the total amount of compensation to be paid each of the respondents. The jury returned a verdict with an acreage price for each parcel but no total award. Respondent contends that the verdict returned was erroneous in that it did not follow either the instructions of the court, the form of the verdict to follow, or the requirements of statute, MCLA § 213.31 (Stat Ann 1958 Rev § 8.21).
The respondent failed to make timely objection to the jury instructions at trial. Objections are waived under GCR 1963, 516.2 if not timely raised.
Respondent further contends that there was a burden on the petitioner to show the necessity for this taking and that that burden was never carried. Competent evidence regarding the necessity for a condemnation was offered. The finding of fact by the jury was sustained by the evidence, and thus it will not be disturbed on appeal. Department of Conservation v. Connor (1947), 316 Mich 565.
Affirmed. No costs.
T. M. Burns, J. concurred.