Plaintiff was the operator of a horse racing facility that had been searching for a new location after announcing it would be closing its location in neighboring Northville. It entered negotiations with the Township for a Planned Unit Development (“PUD”) at undeveloped land in the Township. Plaintiff obtained initial PUD Option approval from the Planning Commission and Township Board in February 2023, contingent on completion of a community benefits agreement. Negotiations over that agreement continued, but ultimately fell apart, and the Township Board rescinded its resolution authorizing negotiations with Plaintiff. Plaintiff filed suit, alleging a taking by unconstitutional conditions, taking without just compensation, violation of the Michigan Zoning Enabling Act, promissory estoppel, violations of procedural and substantive due process, a violation of the Michigan Horse Racing Law of 1995. They sought injunctive relief and damages. RSJA took an aggressive approach to the case, filing a pre-discovery motion for judgment on the pleadings on behalf of the Township. The Court held that Plaintiff lacked a protected property interest in its conditional PUD approval, and that the unconstitutional conditions doctrine did not apply since the PUD negotiation process did not put the Plaintiff in the position of forfeiting a constitutional right. Upon dismissing all federal claims, the Court dismissed the state claims for lack of supplemental jurisdiction.