Quiet title to undeveloped units in a condo project; The Michigan Condominium Act; MCL 559.167(3); Elizabeth Trace Condo Ass’n v American Global Enters, Inc; “Master deed” (MCL 559.108); MCL 559.166(2)(j) & (3); MCL 559.167(1); Amendment recording requirement; MCL 559.191

The court held that because defendant-McGrath did not comply with the Condominium Act’s requirements, MCL 559.167(3) operated to extinguish his rights to the property at issue “when the 10-year period expired, and his units remained unbuilt and not withdrawn.” Thus, it affirmed summary disposition for plaintiff-condominium association. The master deed recorded in 2005 “created 50 units and defined Units 1 through 4 as ‘must be built.’” An attached subdivision plan clarified that all remaining units “need not be built.” Defendant purchased Units 37 through 50. His attorney sent a letter to the development’s property manager, stating that the letter was to act “‘as confirmation that his units are designated "must be built," and therefore, can remain undeveloped after the 10 year anniversary date of commencement of construction.’” His units and several others “were never built, and no amendment to the master deed was ever recorded.” Plaintiff sued defendant to quiet title in 2023. The court held in Elizabeth Trace that “under the relevant version of MCL 559.167(3), ‘[i]f the developer of a condominium project (or its successors or assigns) does not withdraw the undeveloped “need not be built” units from the project within the specified 10-year time period, the land comprising those units becomes part of the project “as general common elements” and all rights to construction on that land cease.’” Thus, in this case, “after the 10-year period expired in 2015, the unbuilt units, by operation of law, ‘remained part of the project as general common elements, and all rights to construct upon that land ceased.’” While defendant sought to distinguish Elizabeth Trace, the court agreed with the trial court that his letter “was insufficient to convert [his] units from ‘need not be built’ to ‘must be built’ to escape the dictates of MCL 559.167(3), requiring that ‘need not be built’ units be constructed within 10 years of the commencement of construction.” There was “no evidence of any amendment of the master deed or subdivision plan to change defendant’s units from ‘need not be built’ to ‘must be built.’” The evidence of his “unilateral correspondence does not suffice to establish an amendment of the master deed or subdivision plan, let alone any official recording of such documents.”