Derek Campbell v. City of Hudson
334073
| Mich. Ct. App. | Oct 19, 2017Background
- On Aug 15, 2014, Hudson DPW received a report (~2:45 p.m.) of a sanitary-sewer blockage on Jefferson Street; DPW dispatched personnel and a jet truck and cleared the blockage within about 15 minutes.
- Around 5:00 p.m. the same day sewage had backed up into plaintiffs Derek and Meghan Campbell’s basement, causing about an inch of sewage across the main basement area.
- Plaintiffs sued the City of Hudson alleging gross negligence (tort under MCL 691.1417 exception to governmental immunity) and inverse condemnation for property damage from the backup.
- The city moved for summary disposition under MCR 2.116(C)(7) and (C)(10), arguing governmental immunity applied because plaintiffs could not prove required elements of MCL 691.1417(3), and that inverse condemnation was barred or unsupported.
- The trial court denied the motion as raising factual issues; the Court of Appeals reviewed de novo and focused on whether plaintiffs met the statutory five-element exception to governmental immunity and whether inverse condemnation was proven.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether governmental immunity is abrogated under MCL 691.1417(3) so city is liable for the sewage backup | City’s jetting caused the backup; factual disputes (causation and city response/time to remedy) preclude summary disposition | City responded promptly; blockage cleared ~15 minutes after report; plaintiffs cannot prove the city failed to take reasonable steps in reasonable time or that city’s action was unreasonable | Reversed trial court: plaintiffs failed to show city failed to take reasonable steps in reasonable time; summary disposition for city on tort claim affirmed on appeal (governmental immunity applies) |
| Whether causation (city’s conduct was a substantial proximate cause) is a triable issue | Plaintiffs contend causation can be inferred from timing, proximity, and the city’s jetting near plaintiffs’ lateral | City’s expert opined city likely not direct cause; but expert acknowledged jetting could have produced a suction effect—evidence does not eliminate a reasonable inference of causation | Causation remained a genuine factual dispute for jury; however, because plaintiffs failed another statutory element (reasonable steps/time), dispute on causation did not save tort claim |
| Whether plaintiffs’ inverse condemnation claim is barred by MCL 691.1417(2) (statutory “sole remedy” language) | Plaintiffs asserted inverse condemnation as constitutional taking arising from the backup and the city’s affirmative actions | City argued statute provides sole remedy for sewage events and/or plaintiff failed to prove inverse condemnation elements | Statutory “sole remedy” language does not override the Constitution; but plaintiffs failed to show a permanent taking or affirmative actions directed at their property—summary disposition for city on inverse condemnation claim affirmed |
| Whether the city’s use of a jet truck was an unreasonable method of remedying the defect | Plaintiffs alleged jetting caused backup and that method was improper | City showed jetting was customary, appropriate, and standard procedure; expert supported its use | Use of jet truck was reasonable and customary; no evidence supported that city should have used a different method |
Key Cases Cited
- Pierce v. City of Lansing, 265 Mich. App. 174 (question of governmental immunity reviewed de novo)
- Willett v. Charter Twp. of Waterford, 271 Mich. App. 38 (sewer obstruction cleared promptly—no failure to take reasonable steps)
- Loweke v. Ann Arbor Ceiling & Partition Co., LLC, 489 Mich. 157 (de novo review of summary disposition)
- Froling Trust v. Bloomfield Hills Country Club, 283 Mich. App. 264 (inverse condemnation requires permanent deprivation or government action aimed at plaintiff’s property)
- Loretto v. Teleprompter Manhattan CATV Corp., 458 U.S. 419 (distinguishes permanent physical occupation/taking from temporary invasions)