The Michigan Supreme Court recently clarified the interplay between Michigan’s Land Division Act (“LDA”), MCL 560.101 et seq., and actions seeking to establish substantive property rights. In Beach v Lima Township, ___ Mich ___ (Docket No. 139394, June 3, 2011), the plaintiffs filed an action to quiet title to certain undeveloped property in Lima Township based on the doctrine of adverse possession. Because the property at issue had been designated as streets on the recorded plat, the township intended to use and develop the property for access to a planned fire department substation. The plaintiffs, however, claimed that they had acquired title to the property by farming it and by maintaining private trails and fences on the property.

The township sought to dismiss the action, arguing that the plaintiffs’ action should have been brought under the LDA, MCL 560.221, which allows a circuit court to vacate, correct, or revise a plat. The circuit court disagreed, finding that the plaintiffs “had established the elements of adverse possession” and “were not required to proceed under the LDA.” The Court of Appeals affirmed, concluding that because the plaintiffs’ adverse possession action “did not expressly seek . . . ‘to vacate, correct, or revise a dedication in a recorded plat,’” they were not required to file an action under the LDA. The Court of Appeals reasoned that “akin to quieting title, resolution of underlying disputes regarding the nature, character, and scope of existing property rights that could potentially lead to plat revisions may be undertaken in the context of an LDA action, but is not mandatory.”