A Wayne County judge sided with Detroit’s district court in a lawsuit brought by a group of tenants over how the court handles safety certifications in eviction cases.
In July, the Detroit Tenants Union sued the 36th District Court, claiming that its judges allow landlords to illegally collect rent or evict tenants when their properties lack a city-issued certificate of compliance. It’s a move the group’s director said at the time would protect renters. On Monday, Sept. 21, Judge Paul J. Cusick of Wayne County Circuit Court granted the 36th District Court’s request to dismiss the case.
The legal fight centered on how just 14% of rental properties in Detroit are compliant. The union argued that the Detroit court could do something about that; the court, in response, said that’s not its job. In recent weeks, Mayor Mary Sheffield announced a plan to bring thousands of properties up to code within a year.
“The result of the lawsuit confirmed that the 36th District Court has been accurately interpreting and applying the law,” said 36th District Court Chief Judge William McConico in a statement to the Free Press. “The Third Circuit found no issue of fact or law and dismissed the case on a motion for summary disposition.”
The Detroit Tenants Union (DTU) plans to appeal.
“We believe the court reached the wrong legal conclusion, but we also view this litigation as a success,” said Steve Rimmer, of the Detroit Tenants Union, in a statement. The work, he said, “is far from finished.”
What did the lawsuit say?
An ordinance requires that landlords have a certificate of compliance from the city’s building department showing their property has been inspected and is safe to live in. And judges, the tenants group said, must require landlords to show that certificate before permitting evictions or rent collection to take place.
The 36th District Court failed to uphold Detroit city code, the tenants union argued, undercutting the protections baked in for tenants living in a city where 14% of rentals have the safety certifications needed to legally operate. The city’s rental ordinance was amended in 2024 to give it more teeth.
The Detroit Tenants Union and an unnamed renter brought the suit against the court in July.
The court, the union said, is equipped to require landlords to demonstrate they have certification to rent out their property. The group asked the circuit court to direct the 36th District Court to issue an administrative order barring judgments for eviction and rent collection for the time period landlords don’t have a valid certificate of compliance, update public facing instructions and forms to say as much and to inform tenants during the first hearing about what the city’s rental ordinance says.
“Throughout this matter, the 36th District Court has acted in accordance with the law and within its role as a neutral judicial entity,” McConico said. “The court remains committed to the fair, responsible, and efficient administration of justice for all parties who come before it.”
In court filings, the 36th District Court argued that it’s not responsible for enforcing the ordinance; that’s the city of Detroit’s role. The court goes on to say that the suit isn’t intended to increase enforcement of local law since it’s not directed at an enforcement agency or the legal arm of the executive branch.
The union and their attorneys “disingenuously seek a loophole in the law that will absolve tenants of all their responsibilities: the responsibility to pay rent, to notify the landlord or BSEED of their issues, even the responsibility to show up to court. They know that judges do not do inspections nor do judges issue tickets for properties that are not in compliance,” the 36th District Court argued in a filing. BSEED is the city of Detroit’s Buildings, Safety Engineering, and Environmental Department.
McConico said the court understands that the tenant group brought the suit as a way to increase certificates of compliance.
“That is an important goal, and Mayor Mary Sheffield has announced a multi-point plan to increase compliance with the city’s rental ordinances,” he said. “The appropriate way to accomplish that goal is through the executive branch, which has the authority and resources to inspect properties, issue certificates of compliance, and enforce the city’s housing ordinances. The mayor’s plan is intended to streamline that process and increase compliance.”
Last month, Sheffield announced a new strategy to ensure thousands of one- and two-family rental properties are certified as safe to live in. City officials vowed to ramp up compliance of an estimated 85,000 rentals from 14% to 25% within a year. That includes tracking illegal properties and sending out notices multiple times before certificates expire. There’s also a new way for tenants to report building issues at www.detroitmi.gov/TenantSupport.
Donovan McCarty, an attorney for the Detroit Tenants Union, reiterated the group’s original argument: “We continue to believe a court should not enter a judgment enforcing rent that Detroit law says cannot be collected.”
Rimmer welcomed the mayor’s commitment to increasing compliance but said that’s not the “finish line.”
“If the courts will not enforce the ordinance’s rent-collection prohibition at the judgment stage, then BSEED and the law department must explain how they will enforce it. If city council believes the ordinance must be made even clearer, then council should act. Whoever is responsible must do the job. A legal prohibition that nobody enforces is not enough to protect Detroit families,” Rimmer said.
Reach reporter Nushrat Rahman at nrahman@freepress.com.
