Legal Opinion · Dissent

Hart v. City of Detroit

Michigan Court of Appeals

Decided June 2, 1980No. Docket 78-3489Published

1DissentR. M. Maher, P.J.

I must dissent from the majority’s opinion which finds the three-*707year statute of limitation in MCL 600.5805(7); MSA 27A.5805(7)1 applicable to this case.

Generally, statutes of limitations are considered to be procedural rather than substantive. Buscaino v Rhodes, 385 Mich 474, 480; 189 NW2d 202 (1971). Statutes of limitations are statutes of repose, i.e., their purpose is to guard against stale claims, where the loss of evidence or witnesses due to death or lapse of time may render the case impossible of proof. Bigelow v Walraven, 392 Mich 566, 570; 221 NW2d 328 (1974), Buscaino v Rhodes,…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Brazos River Authority v. City of GrahamTexas Supreme Court · 1961
  2. Buscaino v. RhodesMichigan Supreme Court · 1971
  3. Ackerman v. Port of SeattleWashington Supreme Court · 1960
  4. Bigelow v. WalravenMichigan Supreme Court · 1974
  5. State Mutual Cyclone Insurance v. O & a Electric CooperativeMichigan Supreme Court · 1968

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API