Hadfield v. Oakland County Drain Commissioner
Michigan Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtBrickley, J.
These four consolidated cases present the issue whether a nuisance exception to governmental immunity remains viable after this Court’s decision in Ross v Consumers Power Co (On Rehearing), 420 Mich 567; 363 NW2d 641 (1984), and, if so, in what form. Consideration of this question necessitates review of two pre-Ross decisions in which this Court was divided over the proper scope of the nuisance exception. See Rosario v City of Lansing, 403 Mich 124; 268 NW2d 230 (1978); Gerzeski v Dep’t of State Hwys, 403 Mich 149; 268 NW2d 525 (1978). There are also *145three minor issues that are resolved in…
2Cases cited62 opinions
- Ross v. Consumers Power Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1985
- Williams v. City of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 1961
- Abel v. Eli Lilly & Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1984
- Bush v. Oscoda Area SchoolsMichigan Supreme Court · 1979
- Lockaby v. Wayne CountyMichigan Supreme Court · 1979
57 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by128 opinions
- Pohutski v. City of Allen ParkMichigan Supreme Court · 2002
- Zelig v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 2002
- Rowland v. Washtenaw County Road CommissionMichigan Supreme Court · 2007
- Peterman v. Department of Natural ResourcesMichigan Supreme Court · 1994
- Adkins v. Thomas Solvent Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1992
123 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.