Veteran Detroit artist Olayami Dabls, the force behind the MBAD African Bead Museum, is taking the city to federal court. On April 10, he filed a lawsuit seeking nearly $5 million after city crews demolished a neighboring building in July 2024 that he says was wrapped in dozens of his murals. The complaint argues his work was torn down before he had a real chance to save it and that the city pushed ahead despite active appeals to halt the demolition.
The case, lodged in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, names the City of Detroit, the Buildings, Safety Engineering and Environmental Department, the Detroit Arts, Culture and Entrepreneurship (ACE) Office, and several city officials as defendants. The filing lists James Lewis and Dabls as plaintiffs, with attorney Andrew Gerber representing them. According to the court docket on Justia, summonses were issued shortly after the complaint was filed on April 10.
What the suit alleges
The lawsuit claims Detroit violated the federal Visual Artists Rights Act by ordering the demolition without obtaining a written waiver from Dabls or giving him the required 90-day window to remove, or pay to remove, any artworks that could be taken down. It seeks nearly $5 million in compensation. According to the Detroit Free Press, the complaint also states that former ACE director Rochelle Riley "verbally committed $25,000" to help with repairs, then pulled that support and told Dabls he would need nearly $500,000 within days or the city would tag the structure for demolition.
Timeline and the city's safety rationale
The dispute traces back to a partial roof and wall collapse and a run of blight tickets and emergency correction orders in mid 2024. Dabls appealed the demolition order and asked a court for a temporary restraining order, but city crews still moved in and razed the structure on July 16, 2024. BridgeDetroit reported that the city labeled the building an immediate safety hazard and that a hearing officer concluded Dabls "could not confirm that he had money to effectuate the rehabilitation of the structure," wording the lawsuit now highlights. BridgeDetroit also documented the appeals process and neighbors’ reactions as the fight unfolded.
Legal stakes under VARA
The complaint leans on Visual Artists Rights Act protections for works of "recognized stature" and on the rule that once a building owner gives written notice, an artist has 90 days to remove a work or pay for its removal before the owner can lawfully proceed, as spelled out in federal copyright law. Courts have shown that significant statutory damages are possible when willful destruction is found, most notably in the 5Pointz case in New York, where artists received roughly $6.7 million after their murals were whitewashed. That outcome is frequently cited in VARA disputes. See 17 U.S.C. §113 and Artnet for background on the statute and the 5Pointz judgment.
Artist response and city comment
Gerber, speaking on Dabls’ behalf, told reporters that "the murals have been completely destroyed" and that the lawsuit is now the only path left to seek compensation for the loss. Detroit Free Press reports that Dabls’ daughter directed media questions to Gerber and that the city did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Riley told the paper she never promised money, and the Free Press account includes her response along with the family’s.
What's next
The case remains open in federal court and could test how Detroit balances emergency demolition powers with federal protections for public art. The docket on Justia confirms the April 10 filing and a demand for a jury trial. An earlier account of the July 2024 teardown is summarized in Hoodline’s coverage of the museum building being demolished despite public outcry. Ultimately, the federal complaint will decide whether Detroit has to pay damages for destroying the murals or whether a court agrees the demolition was justified on safety grounds. As per Hoodline
