Opinion
362839
09-07-2022
Oakland Cares Coalition v. Loree Zelenock
LC No. 2022-195672-AW
Mark J. Cavanagh Presiding Judge Kathleen Jansen Sima G. Patel Judges
ORDER
The motion for immediate consideration is GRANTED.
The motion to expedite is GRANTED and the case considered without oral argument based on the appellant's and appellees' briefs filed by the parties. MCR 7.214(E).
Pursuant to MCR 7.216(A)(7), the Court orders that the September 2, 2022 order denying plaintiff's request for a writ of mandamus is AFFIRMED. To obtain a writ of mandamus, a plaintiff must show "(1) the plaintiff 'has a clear legal right to the performance of the specific duty sought, (2) the defendant has the clear legal duty to perform the act requested, (3) the act is ministerial, and (4) no other remedy exists that might achieve the same result.'" Warren City Council v Buffa, 333 Mich.App. 422, 429; 960 N.W.2d 166 (2020). Plaintiff did not have a clear legal right to have its preferred summary of its initiative appear on the ballot and defendants did not have a clear legal duty to substitute plaintiff's untimely-submitted ballot language in place of the language approved by the Village Council and certified to the county clerk. Furthermore, drafting and adopting appropriate ballot language involves exercise of discretion and judgment and so cannot be considered a ministerial act which may be compelled by a writ of mandamus. Hillsdale Co Senior Servs, Inc v Hillsdale Co, 494 Mich. 46, 58 n 11; 832 N.W.2d 728 (2013).
This order shall have immediate effect. MCR 7.215(F)(2). This is our final judgment in this matter, see MCR 7.215(E)(1), and therefore this Court retains no further jurisdiction.