Legal Opinion · Dissent

Johnson-McIntosh v. City of Detroit

Michigan Court of Appeals

Decided July 26, 2005No. Docket 244349Published

1DissentMeter, J.

I respectfully dissent. If this case involved a defective traffic control device on a noncounty highway over which Detroit had jurisdiction, then statutory language, common sense, and case law support the conclusion that Detroit may be held liable for the injury in question. Conversely, if this case *331involved a defective traffic control device on a county highway over which Detroit had jurisdiction, then Detroit may be held liable if the two conditions set forth in MCL 691.1402a(l) were satisfied. I would remand this case for further proceedings.

I. PERTINENT STATUTES

In general, “a governmental…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Nawrocki v. MacOmb County Road CommissionMichigan Supreme Court · 2000
  2. Novak v. Nationwide Mutual InsuranceMichigan Court of Appeals · 1999
  3. Chase v. American Cartage Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1922
  4. City of Detroit v. Michigan Public Utilities CommissionMichigan Supreme Court · 1939
  5. O'HARE v. City of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 1960

9 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