Legal Opinion

McMillan v. State Highway Commission

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided September 16, 1986No. 73474, (Calendar No. 8)PublishedCited by 53 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*49Cavanagh, J.

The lower courts ruled, as a matter of law, that Detroit Edison owed no duty of reasonable care to an occupant of a vehicle which leaves the traveled portion of the highway and strikes a utility pole located on the median. We reverse.

On January 10, 1976, plaintiff Tamara McMillan1 was a passenger in an automobile traveling south on Woodward Avenue in the City of Royal Oak. Woodward is a state-owned highway. At the point in question, the north- and southbound lanes are separated by a grassy median strip. The vehicle was struck by a hit-and-run driver, went out of control, and…

2Cases cited31 opinions

  1. Moning v. AlfonoMichigan Supreme Court · 1977
  2. Placek v. City of Sterling HeightsMichigan Supreme Court · 1979
  3. Clark v. DalmanMichigan Supreme Court · 1967
  4. Fiser v. City of Ann ArborMichigan Supreme Court · 1983
  5. Hyde v. County of RensselaerNew York Court of Appeals · 1980

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

3Cited by53 opinions

  1. MacK v. City of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 2002
  2. DiFranco v. PickardMichigan Supreme Court · 1986
  3. Charles Reinhart Co. v. WiniemkoMichigan Supreme Court · 1994
  4. Lowe v. Estate Motors Ltd.Michigan Supreme Court · 1987
  5. Mississippi Power & Light Co. v. LumpkinMississippi Supreme Court · 1998

48 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