1. Read the Complaint

Filed Sep. 20, 2021

Click here to download the PDF.

2. Read Ottawa County’s Response

Oct. 11, 2021

Click here to download the PDF.

3. Read the Updated Complaint

Oct. 25, 2021

Click here to download the PDF.

4. Government Overreach Must Be Challenged

Ottawa Impact is raising money to help the people of Ottawa County fund this lawsuit.

Please donate to the Legal Fund to support this lawsuit.

Donate Now

Excerpts from Ottawa County’s Response

These images show parts of Ottawa County’s response to the lawsuit.

Lawsuit Summary

Count 1

Judicial Declaration: The county commission has statutory duty to “approve” or “disapprove” of the mask mandate

The health department’s authority is limited by statute, including when issuing regulations.

The county commission has a mandatory duty to exercise oversight over health department regulations.

The health department’s mandate is procedurally invalid because they did not obtain approval from the county commission.

Count 2

Mandamus

Mandamus is properly employed “to require a body or an officer charged with a duty to take action in the matter.”

The lawsuit requests the court to issue a writ of mandamus compelling the county commission to comply with its statutory duty and vote to either “approve” or “disapprove” the mask mandate as required by the plain language of MCL333.2441.

Count 3

Judicial Declaration: MCL 333.2451 does not authorize the mask mandate

Any determination that an “imminent danger” exists must be set forth in the order to which it relates, according to MCL 333.2441.

The mask mandate does not contain any determination or factual findings to support a determination of imminent danger.

Since the health department failed to trigger authority under MCL 333.2451, the mandate is invalid and unenforceable.

Count 4

Judicial Declaration: MCL 333.2453 does not authorize the mask mandate

The mask mandate does not prohibit the gathering of people for any purpose, referred to in MCL 333.2453(1).

The health department made no findings that the mask mandate was necessary to “ensure” or was in any way related to the “continuation of essential public health services and the enforcement of health laws.”

To the extent the mask order relies on MCL 333.2453, the mandate is invalid and unenforceable.

Count 5

Judicial Declaration: Mich Admin Code R 325.175(4) does not authorize the mask mandate

While Rule 325.175(4) allows the health department to “exclude” individuals with communicable diseases from attending school programs, it does not allow for a preemptive, blanket mask mandate.

Request for Relief

The Plaintiffs respectfully request that this Honorable Court:

a. Order “a speedy hearing” of this action and “advance it on the calendar” of the docket under MCR 2.605(D);

b. Issue a judgement providing the declaratory relief articulated in each of the counts;

c. Issue a writ of mandamus compelling the County Commission to comply with its statutory duty and vote to either “approve” or “disapprove” of the mask mandate; and

d. Grant any other relief deemed to be equitable and just.