Preview:

STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS


TIFFANY DOBSON and JENNIFER BROGNO, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v CITY OF ANN ARBOR, Defendant-Appellee.

UNPUBLISHED January 23, 2007

No. 257634 Washtenaw Circuit Court LC No. 03-001282-CZ

Before: Murray, P.J., and Fitzgerald and Owens, JJ. PER CURIAM. Plaintiffs Tiffany Dobson and Jennifer Brogno appeal by right the trial court's order granting summary disposition in favor of defendant city of Ann Arbor pursuant to MCR 2.116(C)(5) and (C)(8). We affirm. This case involves a dispute arising from the "franchise fee" charges included in plaintiffs' Comcast cable bills. Plaintiffs assert that the portion of their bills designated as a "franchise fee" is in reality a tax levied by defendant on cable subscribers. Plaintiffs further allege that defendant levied this "tax" without voter approval and incorporated excess revenue into its general fund, in violation of the Headlee Amendment to the Michigan Constitution. Defendants contend that the franchise fee is paid by the cable provider, not the cable subscribers, and is not a tax. Plaintiff filed the instant suit on November 18, 2003, seeking to recover the excess "franchise fees" collected by defendant. The trial court granted summary disposition to defendant, finding that plaintiffs lacked standing to bring the claims alleged and failed to state a claim on which relief could be granted. Specifically, the trial court concluded that the franchise fee is not an impermissible tax under the Headlee Amendment. Plaintiffs maintain that the trial court erred in determining that they were not real parties in interest and did not have proper standing to bring this suit. MCR 2.116(C)(5). We do not agree. The issue whether a party has standing is a question of law that we review de novo. Lee v Macomb Co Bd of Comm'rs, 464 Mich 726, 734; 629 NW2d 900 (2001). To bring a cause of action under this provision, a party must have standing as described in the Headlee Amendment: Any taxpayer of the state shall have standing to bring suit in the Michigan State Court of Appeals to enforce the provisions of Sections 25 through 31, inclusive, of this Article and, if the suit is sustained, shall receive from the -1-


applicable unit of government his costs incurred in maintaining such suit. [Const 1963, art 9,

Download TIFFANY DOBSON V CITY OF ANN ARBOR.pdf

Michigan Law