UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT

┐ FREDERICK GRAINGER, JR., │ Plaintiff, │ │ BRIAN BEHOVITZ, │ > No. 23-1230 Proposed Intervenor-Appellant, │ │ v. │ │ │ OTTAWA COUNTY, MICHIGAN, by its Board of │ Commissioners, et al., │ Defendants-Appellees. │ ┘

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Michigan at Grand Rapids. No. 1:19-cv-00501—Paul Lewis Maloney, District Judge.

Argued: December 7, 2023

Decided and Filed: January 5, 2024

Before: CLAY, GIBBONS, and GRIFFIN, Circuit Judges.

_________________

COUNSEL ARGUED: Philip L. Ellison, OUTSIDE LEGAL COUNSEL PLC, Hemlock, Michigan, for Appellant. Matthew T. Nelson, WARNER NORCROSS + JUDD, LLP, Grand Rapids, Michigan, for Appellee. ON BRIEF: Philip L. Ellison, OUTSIDE LEGAL COUNSEL PLC, Hemlock, Michigan, E. Powell Miller, THE MILLER LAW FIRM, P.C., Rochester, Michigan, for Appellant. Matthew T. Nelson, WARNER NORCROSS + JUDD, LLP, Grand Rapids, Michigan, for Appellee. No. 23-1230 Grainger, et al. v. Ottawa Cnty., Mich., et al. Page 2

_________________

OPINION _________________

CLAY, Circuit Judge. Three days after the district court denied Plaintiff Frederick Grainger, Jr.’s motion for class certification based on his inability to serve as a class representative, Brian Behovitz moved to intervene as a new putative class representative. Behovitz now appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to intervene as of right and permissively under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 24. For the reasons set forth below, we AFFIRM the district court’s denial of Behovitz’s motion to intervene.

I. BACKGROUND

A. Grainger’s Putative Class Action

On June 23, 2019, Grainger filed a putative class action complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 against Ottawa County and other Michigan counties, alleging various federal and state law claims. To recover unpaid property taxes, these counties foreclosed on homes and sold them at auction. However, Grainger alleged that the counties had a policy of retaining all the proceeds of these home foreclosure auctions, even if those proceeds vastly exceeded the unpaid property taxes of the homeowners.1 Grainger owned property within Ottawa County, Michigan. He had unpaid property taxes of $21,500 on his home, and Ottawa County seized the property on April 1, 2013. In September 2013, 2 Ottawa County sold Grainger’s property for $392,000 but never returned to Grainger the $370,500 difference between Grainger’s outstanding taxes and the proceeds of the sale. After Grainger filed a second

1Michigan counties’ practice of retaining the full proceeds from sales of foreclosed property has generated much liti