Detroit tenants sue over 36th District Court certificate rules

Detroit tenants and legal advocates have sued over whether landlords must prove that rental properties meet the city’s safety-certification requirements before collecting rent or winning possession judgments in eviction cases.

The Detroit Tenants Union and attorneys connected to the Michigan State University College of Law Housing Justice Clinic filed the lawsuit July 2, 2026, in Wayne County Circuit Court. The case names 36th District Court Chief Judge William McConico in his administrative capacity and challenges how Certificate of Compliance requirements are applied in Detroit eviction proceedings.

What the tenants are asking the court to change

The lawsuit argues that landlords should not be allowed to obtain judgments for unpaid rent or possession of a property unless they first establish that the rental has a required City of Detroit Certificate of Compliance.

That position goes beyond simply asking whether a certificate is present in a case file. The tenants’ claim is that compliance should be treated as a threshold issue before a landlord can prevail on rent or possession claims. The lawsuit remains pending, and those allegations have not been resolved by a final ruling.

What the 36th District Court currently says

The court’s public landlord-tenant guidance says landlords starting a summary proceeding will be asked to provide a City of Detroit Certificate of Compliance. The guidance warns that failing to provide the certificate could negatively affect a case and includes the document on the court’s landlord-tenant filing checklist.

At the same time, the court’s written materials describe certificate-related protections as defenses tenants may raise. The guidance also says tenants seeking defenses under Detroit City Code Section 8-15-82 may be asked whether rent was paid into escrow.

That distinction is central to the dispute. The tenants’ attorneys argue the requirement should be enforced broadly before rent or possession judgments are entered. The court’s current public procedures describe the certificate as part of the filing process and as an issue that may affect a case, but they do not establish that every landlord without a certificate is automatically barred from every eviction proceeding.

Why the certificate issue matters in Detroit

A Certificate of Compliance is tied to Detroit’s rental-property registration, inspection and property-maintenance requirements. Tenant advocates say requiring proof of compliance in eviction cases would give those safety rules more practical force, particularly when renters are facing the loss of their homes.

Detroit-specific reporting and an MSU Law statement have cited a city figure that about 14% of rental properties had an active Certificate of Compliance. That figure is reported city data referenced in coverage of the dispute, not a new calculation made for this article.

Landlords’ attorneys oppose a court-wide directive and argue certificate questions should be handled by the assigned judge on a case-by-case basis. WDET reported that the court did not comment on the pending litigation.

What happens next

The lawsuit itself has not changed the court’s published procedures, created an injunction or established a ruling date. The next significant development could be a court response, procedural order, hearing, briefing schedule or other filing clarifying how Certificate of Compliance questions will be handled.

Detroit renters or landlords with active eviction cases should not assume that the lawsuit determines the outcome of an individual case. Anyone facing a filing or hearing should seek advice promptly from a qualified attorney or tenant legal-aid provider.

Sources

• 36th District Court landlord-tenant guidance
• Michigan State University College of Law
• Wdet
• Bridgedetroit