Pick v Szymczak
Michigan Supreme Court
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partBoyle, J.
As alleged in plaintiffs’ complaint and clarified at oral argument, plaintiffs allege three grounds for recovery: defective design of the intersection, failure to place traffic signals or warning signs at the intersection, and failure to post signs at an intersection allegedly obscured on one side by vegetation.1 The intersection in question is the crossing of two county secondary gravel roads. Plaintiff was traveling east on Roosevelt Road when his vehicle was struck in the intersection by a vehicle traveling south on Crapo Road that failed to yield the right of way.
I conclude that…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Skinner v. Square D Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1994
- Tuttle v. Department of State HighwaysMichigan Supreme Court · 1976
- Scheurman v. Department of TransportationMichigan Supreme Court · 1990
- City of Grand Rapids v. Grand Rapids Lodge No 97, Fraternal Order of PoliceMichigan Supreme Court · 1982
- Salvati v. Department of State HighwaysMichigan Supreme Court · 1982
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.