Michigan Court of Appeals.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
Decided December 5, 1978.
Decided December 5, 1978.
Attorney(s) appearing for the Case
Lacey & Jones (by John L. Salter), for plaintiffs.
Lakin & Worsham, P.C., for defendants City of Oak Park and R. Howell.
John N. Highland, for defendants Bloomfield Township and Bloomfield Township Police Department.
Bernard Girard, for defendants City of Bloomfield Hills and Bloomfield Hills Police Department.
Conklin & Maloney, for defendants City of Clawson, Clawson Police Department, Lathrup Village, Lathrup Village Police Department, Farmington, Farmington Police Department, City of Novi, and City of Novi Police Department.
Vandeveer, Garzia, Tonkin, Kerr & Heaphy, P.C., for defendants City of Southfield, Southfield Police Department, Daniel Mead and James Gutenburr.
Johnson, Campbell & Moesta, for defendants City of Troy and Troy Police Department.
Harvey, Kruse & Westen, P.C., for defendants City of Huntington Woods, Huntington Woods Police Department, Huntington Woods Department of Public Safety, Village of Beverly Hills, Beverly Hills Police Department and Officer Danaher.
Dice, Sweeney, Sullivan & Feikens, P.C., for defendants City of Madison Heights and Madison Heights Police Department.
Stewart, O'Reilly, Cornell, Donovan, Lascoe & Rancilio, P.C., for defendants City of Ferndale, Ferndale Police Department and Officer Kellogg.
Plunkett, Cooney, Rutt, Waters, Stanczyk & Pedersen (by Joseph V. Walker and Jeannette A. Paskin), for defendants City of Berkley, Berkley Police Department, City of Birmingham and Birmingham Police Department.
Davidson, Gotshall, Kohl, Secrest, Wardle,Lynch & Clark (by Wayne C. Gardner), for defendant Village of Bingham Farms.
Before: BRONSON, P.J., and ALLEN and T.M. BURNS, JJ.
Michigan Court of Appeals.
ALLEN, J.
This author and Judge BRONSON, who writes separately, concur in the opinion of Judge T.M. BURNS except that portion thereof holding that the defense of "governmental immunity" does not apply to the municipal defendants themselves. We simply cannot agree that the police training exercise being conducted when plaintiff was struck in the face by rice pellets was not a governmental function. Therefore, we would affirm the grant of summary judgment in favor of...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting Sign on now to see your case. Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
Updated daily.
Uncompromising quality.
Complete, Accurate, Current.
Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full
text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.
Cited Cases
No Cases Found
Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the
full text of the citing case.
