Oliver v. Smith
290 Mich. App. 678
| Mich. Ct. App. | 2010Background
- This is a tort action alleging excessive use of force by a Dearborn Heights police officer, Cory Smith.
- Plaintiff sues the city, department, and officers after an arrest for interfering during a November 9, 2001 incident, alleging injurious handcuffing.
- The trial court denied Smith’s summary disposition based on governmental immunity, noting discovery was incomplete.
- This Court previously affirmed the denial and indicated Smith could obtain summary disposition after discovery.
- The Supreme Court in Odom v Wayne Co provides a stepwise test for applying individual governmental immunity to negligent claims; this Court applies that framework here.
- The court conducts a de novo review to determine whether Smith is entitled to immunity under MCL 691.1407(2) for negligent claims and under Ross for intentional torts, concluding immunity applies.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Smith is entitled to governmental immunity for the negligent handcuffing claim. | Plaintiff contends the tight handcuffing caused injury and may reflect gross negligence. | Smith acted within authority and did not commit gross negligence or proximate cause. | Yes; Smith entitled to immunity for negligent claim. |
| Whether Smith acted in good faith for the assault and battery claim under Ross. | Plaintiff argues lack of good faith evidenced by laughter and conduct. | Smith acted in good faith under the circumstances and without malice. | Yes; good faith supported immunity under Ross. |
| Whether handcuffing was a discretionary act rather than ministerial, affecting immunity. | Handcuffing under pressure was ministerial and not immune. | Handcuffing was a discretionary decision to safely defuse the situation. | Yes; handcuffing was discretionary, applying immunity. |
Key Cases Cited
- Odom v Wayne Co, 482 Mich 459 (2008) (outlines steps for applying governmental immunity to negligent torts)
- Ross v Consumers Power Co (On Rehearing), 420 Mich 633 (1984) (tests for individual immunity in intentional torts; discretionary vs ministerial)
- Robinson v Detroit, 462 Mich 439 (2000) (defining proximate cause for governmental immunity)
- Tarlea v Crabtree, 263 Mich App 80 (2004) (discretionary vs ministerial analysis in police conduct)
- Costa v Community Emergency Med Servs, Inc., 475 Mich 403 (2006) (gross negligence standard for immunity)
- Watson v Quarles, 146 Mich App 759 (1985) (discretionary act guidance in police decisions)
- Oliver v Smith, 269 Mich App 560 (2006) (handcuffing may constitute gross negligence if injury results; discovery timing)