Yu v. City of Ann Arbor is a case that was filed in Washtenaw Circuit Court in February 2014 by three Ann Arbor residents. Their complaint is based on a claim of inverse condemnation by the city of Ann Arbor. The Plaintiffs allege that through its footing drain disconnection (FDD) program, the city government effectuated a "taking" of private property, but failed to pay the compensation required under due process.

The city's FDD ordinance was enacted in 2001. It establishes a program under which property owners can be required to disconnect their footing drains from the sanitary sewer system. The disconnection of footing drains entails the installation of a sump crock and a pump inside the homeowner's basement. The city's position is that the intent of the ordinance is to diminish the risk of sanitary overflows into the Huron River and of sanitary sewage backups in homeowners’ basements.

For background on the subject matter and the history of the ordinance, see Ann Arbor Chronicle coverage "Backups: Lawyers, Sewers, Pumps"

On October 30, 2015, a class action complaint was filed on behalf of all Ann Arbor residents who were compelled to install sump pumps under the City's FDD program. The class action complaint expressly excludes the Yu v. City of Ann Arbor Plaintiffs. The class action is Lumbard v. City of Ann Arbor.

Currently Scheduled Court Events

For the most up-to-date information on upcoming events, check the online Washtenaw County Trial Court records in connection with the Yu v. City of Ann Arbor case. The online Trial Court calendar, searchable by judge, is also a useful tool for confirming hearing dates.

• 04.16.15 Hearing in Washtenaw Circuit Court: Defendant's Motion for Summary Disposition.

Past Court Events

• 02.12.15 Hearing in Washtenaw Circuit Court: Plaintiff's Motion for Sanctions. Ruling by Judge Timothy Connors: Denied.  In their Motion, Plaintiffs contended that the city of Ann Arbor had in its pleadings to date made statements that were not well-grounded in fact or had no arguable legal basis. At the hearing, Connors indicated that the city's statements were within bounds and did not rise to the point of being sanctionable – because he considered the Court to be a forum in which each party was entitled to voice its view of the truth. Connors indicated that the kind of issues raised by the Plaintiffs were of the kind that could be used to impeach arguments made to the jury when the case matured to that point, but that ultimately his job was to ensure that the jury was able to hear both sides' view of the truth.
• 02.06.15 Papers Filed: [.pdf of Yu v. City of A2: Response to Second Amended Brief, Opposing Plaintiff's Motion for Sanctions]
• 02.06.15 Papers Filed: [ .pdf of Yu v. City of A2: Response to Amended Brief, Opposing Plaintiff's Motion for Sanctions]
• 02.05.15 Papers Filed: [.pdf of Yu v. City of A2: Second Amended Brief in Support of Plaintiff's Motion for Sanctions]
• 01.20.15 Papers Filed: [.pdf of Yu v. City of A2: Amended Brief in support of Plaintiff's Motion for Sanctions] Note: The Motion for Sanctions contends that the city of Ann Arbor has in its pleadings thus far in the case made statements that are not well-grounded in fact or have no arguable legal basis.
• 11.20.14 Hearing in Washtenaw Circuit Court: Defendant's Motion for Summary Disposition. Ruling by Judge Timothy Connors: Denied in Part; Granted in Part. Connors rejected the city of Ann Arbor's position that the Plaintiff had failed to state a claim on which relief could be granted, because inverse condemnation is a cause of action in Michigan. So the case stayed in court. But Connors agreed there was no separate cause of action under Michigan Compiled Law 213.23, which covers the state's authority to take private property for public use. .
• 10.23.14 Hearing in Washtenaw Circuit Court: Plaintiffs' Appeal to Chief Judge on Disqualification of Connors. Ruling by Judge David Swartz: Motion Denied.
• 10.02.14 Hearing in Washtenaw Circuit Court: Plaintiffs' Motion for Disqualification of Connors. Ruling by Judge Timothy Connors: Motion Denied.
• 08.27.14 Hearing in Washtenaw Circuit Court: Plaintiffs' Motion for Disqualification of City Attorney, Re-Assignment Away from Connors, and Sanctions. Ruling by Judge Donald Shelton: Motions for Disqualification and Re-Assignment Denied; Motion for Sanctions Adjourned (Delayed) ["Decision on Sanctions Shifts from Shelton"]
• 08.22.14 Papers Filed: [.pdf of Yu v. City of Ann Arbor: Brief Opposing Motion on Sanctions]
• 08.22.14 Papers Filed: [.pdf of Yu v. City of Ann Arbor: Brief Opposing Motion to Disqualify Counsel]
• 08.20.14 Papers Filed: [.pdf of Yu v. City of Ann Arbor: Brief in Support of Motion to Disqualify Counsel]
• 08.19.14 Papers Filed: [.pdf of Yu v. City of A2: Brief in Support of Motion on Sanctions]
• 07.02.14 Hearing in Washtenaw Circuit Court: Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction. Ruling by Judge Donald Shelton: Motion for Preliminary Injunction Denied ["Footing Drain Lawsuit: City Survives Motion"]
• 06.26.14 Papers Filed: [.pdf of Yu v. City of A2: Response to Motion for PI]
• 06.09.14 Papers Filed: [Yu v. City of A2: Motion for Summary Disposition]
• 05.28.14 Hearing in US District Court: Plaintiff's Motion for Remand. Ruling by Judge Avern Cohn: Motion was granted by Judge Avern Cohn, thus sending the case back to Washtenaw County Circuit Court. ["Footing Drain Lawsuit Back to State Court"]
• 04.24.14 Papers Filed: [.pdf of Yu v. City of A2: Reply to Response on Remand]
• 04.17.14 Papers Filed: [.pdf of Yu v. City of A2: Response to Motion for Remand]
• 04.03.14 Papers Filed: [.pdf of Yu v. City of A2: Motion for Remand]
  Note: This is the Plaintiff's move to counter the removal of the case to federal court and to bring it back to state court (i.e., the Washtenaw County Circuit Court). At this point the case is in federal court.
• 03.24.14 Papers Filed: [.pdf of Yu v. City of A2: Motion to Dismiss]
• 03.17.14 Papers Filed: [.pdf of Yu v. City of A2: Notice of Removal]
  Note: Here the city of Ann Arbor exercised its right to attempt to remove the case from the state courts to the federal courts.
• 02.27.14 Papers Filed: [.pdf of Yu v. City of A2: Brief in Support of PI]
• 02.27.14 Papers Filed: [.pdf of Yu v. City of A2: Motion for Preliminary Injunction]
• 02.27.14 Papers Filed: [.pdf of Yu v. City of A2: Complaint]