Debunking Michigan’s Myth Abou...
In Plachta v Plachta, ___ Mich App ___; ___ NW3d ___ (2026) (Docket No. 374260), the Michigan Court of Appeals confirmed what should have be...
Read MorePhone 517.381.0100
High Contrast
We are involved in our communities, our profession, and our clients' associations and activities.
Answer: No. The nonconforming use doctrine—sometimes called “grandfathering”—only applies to zoning ordinances, not to building code violations or other municipal regulations. A prior nonconforming use is only permissible if it existed before a zoning regulation’s effective date—and even then, the property owner must offer evidence the property was operated as a “lawful use” before the ordinance was enacted. Building code violations, fire code violations, and similar regulatory requirements must still be addressed regardless of how long the property has been out of compliance. This also means that such code compliance issues can be the obligation of a current owner even if title to the property was acquired from a previous owner.
In Plachta v Plachta, ___ Mich App ___; ___ NW3d ___ (2026) (Docket No. 374260), the Michigan Court of Appeals confirmed what should have be...
Read MorePromises to pay are easy to make and notoriously expensive to enforce. Even a straightforward claim can be trapped in months—or years—of...
Read MoreYes. On December 23, 2025, Governor Whitmer signed Public Act 58 of 2025, amending Section 108 of the Michigan Land Division Act (MCL 560.10...
Read MoreAt Fahey Schultz Burzych Rhodes PLC, we’ve been helping municipalities, franchised businesses, employers, and more with their legal needs since 2008. We’d love to learn how we can help you, too.