The Michigan Supreme Court has ordered further briefing and will hear oral arguments in the following two fair fair housing cases:

Riverbrook v. Fabode, 333 Mich App 645 (2020).

In re Estate of Romig, 334 Mich App 188 (2020).

The Riverbrook case addressed the sufficiency of medical certifications for support animals. The case interprets the federal Fair Housing Act.

The Romig case considers whether reasonable modification requests need to be made at the onset of ownership or occupancy, or whether the requests may be made at later point in time. The Romig case arises under the Michigan Persons With Disabilities Civil Rights Act.

Like the U.S. Supreme Court, Michigan Supreme Court’s authority to review fair housing cases is discretionary. As explained on the Michigan Supreme Court’s website: “Each year, the [Michigan] Supreme Court receives over 2,000 applications for leave to appeal from litigants primarily seeking review of decisions by the Michigan Court of Appeals. The Supreme Court's authority to hear cases is discretionary. The Court grants leave to those cases of greatest complexity and public import, where additional briefing and oral argument are essential to reaching a just outcome.”

In general, many years pass before a fair housing case is accepted for review by the Michigan Supreme Court or the U.S. Supreme Court. The most recent fair housing decision by the Michigan Supreme occurred over 20 years ago in McCready v. Hoffius, 459 Mich. 1235 (1999), vacating and remanding, 459 Mich. 131 (1998). The most recent U.S. Supreme Court decision issued in a fair housing case occurred approximately 5 years ago in Bank of America Corp. v. City of Miami, 137 S. Ct. 1296 (2017).

Against this backdrop, it is notable for the Michigan Supreme Court to be reviewing two fair housing cases.

The Center will report the outcomes in Riverbrook and Romig once the Michigan Supreme Court completes its review and issues decisions in these cases.