Whether condo units reverted to the general common elements; The Condominium Act; MCL 559.167(3); Elizabeth Trace Condo Ass’n v American Global Enters, Inc; An amendment to the master deed that did not take effect; Equitable estoppel; Failure to record a replat of the reversion; Cove Creek Condo Ass’n v Vista Land & Home Dev, LLC; Comparing Wellesley Gardens Condo Ass’n v Manek (Unpub); Constitutionality of MCL 559.167(3); Settlement agreement contract; Clark v Al-Amin; MCR 2.507(G); Jurisdiction; Final order

The court held that ownership of the condo units at issue reverted to defendant/appellee-Association “10 years after construction commenced, because the units were neither complete nor withdrawn from the project.” It rejected defendant/appellant-Triple’s claims that the Association was equitably estopped from denying plaintiff-PCJ title to the units and that MCL 559.167(3) was facially unconstitutional. It also held that “the parties reached a binding settlement agreement,” and Triple’s later conduct indicating its change of heart did not release it from its obligations to abide by the terms. Triple challenged orders on appeal that (1) granted in part and denied in part PCJ’s “motion to compel compliance with a court order requiring Triple to make a second settlement payment;” (2) entered the written settlement agreement; (3) denied its summary disposition motion and instead granted it to the Association; and (4) granted PCJ’s “motion to enforce the settlement agreement and ordered the release of the second settlement payment from escrow to” PCJ. As an initial matter, the court rejected PCJ’s challenge to its jurisdiction over Triple’s claim of appeal. As to the grant of summary disposition to the Association, the court rejected Triple’s assertion that it never lost its ownership interest in the units under MCL 559.167. This involved “the interpretation and application of MCL 559.167(3) as it existed at the relevant times in this case.” The court found meritless Triple’s contention that the “units did not revert to the general common elements under MCL 559.167(3) because” they were not undeveloped. The court clearly stated in Elizabeth Trace “that, to avoid reversion under the version of MCL 559.167(3) that applies in this matter, units must be completed. That is also consistent with the plain language of the statute[.]” As Triple failed to complete construction of the units, ownership of the “units reverted to the Association in 2014[.]” While Triple asserted that the Association’s co-owners “passed a proposed first amendment to the master deed, which reinstated the subject units from the general common elements” in 2017, that amendment did not take effect and thus, the “units were never reinstated.” The court further concluded that, based on “the plain statutory language, the Association was not required to record a replat of the reversion.” Affirmed.