Mote v. City of Chelsea
District Court, E.D. Michigan
1Opinion of the Court
Second, there is no evidence to support the WCRC's theory that pavement shifting over time caused the out-of-compliance measurements found in 2017 and 2018. For instance, the Northwest and Northeast ramps at Arthur Street do not exhibit any signs of heaving, buckling, cracking, or settling in 2018. All flags of concrete were flush, and joints between ramp, curb, and gutter pan were flush and even. Shifting concrete is easily identifiable by visible cracking, distortion of joints, and changes in elevation resulting in uneven abutting slabs. None were observed at the curb ramps in the…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Lujan v. Defenders of WildlifeSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Baker v. CarrSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- City of Los Angeles v. LyonsSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- O'Shea v. LittletonSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Clapper v. Amnesty International USASupreme Court of the United States · 2013
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Polyweave Packaging, Inc. v. ButtigiegDistrict Court, W.D. Kentucky · 2021
- Stanton v. Detroit, City ofDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 2024
- Uselmann v. PopDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 2025