Legal Opinion

Henry v. Dow Chemical Company

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided July 13, 2005No. Docket 125205PublishedCited by 152 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCorrigan, J.

The 173 plaintiffs in this matter have asked to represent a putative class of thousands in an action against defendant, The Dow Chemical Company. Their core allegation is that Dow’s plant in Midland, Michigan, negligently released dioxin, a synthetic chemical that is potentially hazardous to human health,1 into the Tittabawassee flood plain where the plaintiffs and the putative class members live and work.

This situation appears, at first blush, to have the makings of a standard tort cause of action. But closer inspection of plaintiffs’ motion for class certification reveals that one of…

2Cases cited28 opinions

  1. Maiden v. RozwoodMichigan Supreme Court · 1999
  2. Ayers v. Township of JacksonSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1987
  3. Radtke v. EverettMichigan Supreme Court · 1993
  4. City of Chicago v. Beretta U.S.A. Corp.Illinois Supreme Court · 2004
  5. Metro-North Commuter Railroad v. BuckleySupreme Court of the United States · 1997

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

3Cited by152 opinions

  1. Caronia v. Philip Morris USA, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2013
  2. Means v. United States Conference of Catholic BishopsCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2016
  3. Hill v. Sears, Roebuck and CoMichigan Supreme Court · 2012
  4. Henry v. Dow Chemical Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 2009
  5. Hecht v. National Heritage Academies, IncMichigan Supreme Court · 2016

147 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