Legal Opinion

Brown v. Manistee County Road Commission

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided July 16, 1996No. 99566, Calendar No. 11PublishedCited by 78 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCavanagh, J.

In this case, we granted leave to appeal to consider (1) whether the plaintiff’s action is governed by the sixty-day notice provision of MCL 224.21; MSA 9.121 or the 120-day notice provision of MCL 691.1404; MSA 3.996(104), (2) whether our rule in Hobbs v State Hwys Dep’t, 398 Mich 90; 247 NW2d 754 (1976), requiring a showing of prejudice, should be overruled, and (3) if we reaffirm Hobbs, whether there has been a showing of prejudice in the instant case. We hold that the 120-day notice provision applies in an action for personal injuries against a county road commission. Further, we reaffirm…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. United States v. Carolene Products Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1938
  2. United States v. Carolene Products Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1938
  3. Ross v. Consumers Power Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1985
  4. Burnet v. Coronado Oil & Gas Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1932
  5. Shavers v. Attorney GeneralMichigan Supreme Court · 1978

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

3Cited by78 opinions

  1. Adair v. StateMichigan Supreme Court · 2004
  2. Rowland v. Washtenaw County Road CommissionMichigan Supreme Court · 2007
  3. McCORMICK v. CARRIERMichigan Supreme Court · 2010
  4. Lansing Schools Education Ass'n v. Lansing Board of EducationMichigan Supreme Court · 2010
  5. McCAHAN v. BRENNANMichigan Supreme Court · 2012

73 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