Civil forfeiture proceedings; Immunity from prosecution pursuant to the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act (MMMA); Claim seeking the fair market value of marijuana destroyed by the Michigan State Police (MSP); “Claim”; CAM Constr v Lake Edgewood Condo Ass’n; Subject-matter jurisdiction; MCL 600.605; Bowie v Arder; Court of Claims jurisdiction; Ancillary jurisdiction

The court held that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to order the Prosecutor’s Office to reimburse claimant for the fair market value of marijuana seized during a traffic stop and destroyed by the MSP. The MSP seized $11,213 and 15 pounds of marijuana during the stop. But the charges were dropped when it was determined claimant was immune under the MMMA. He then filed this action seeking the return of the money and the fair market value of the marijuana. The trial court found it lacked the authority to order the MSP to pay claimant for the destruction of his property, but it believed he was nevertheless entitled to compensation, so it ordered the Prosecutor’s Office, which brought this action, to pay him $66,328 for the destroyed marijuana. On appeal, the court found the trial court lacked jurisdiction. “[B]ecause the MSP was a necessary party to resolve claimant’s claim for compensation for the destroyed marijuana, the Court of Claims had exclusive jurisdiction over the claim. This in turn deprived the trial court of jurisdiction to resolve claimant’s claim. Because it lacked subject-matter jurisdiction over claimant’s claim for compensation for the destroyed marijuana, the trial court should have dismissed the claim rather than holding the Wayne County Prosecutor’s Office liable for it.” Reversed.