Thomas J Petipren v. Rodney Jaskowski, 494 Mich. 190

Case about absolute governmental immunity under MCL 691.1407(5) for the highest appointive executive official; question whether arresting a citizen fell within executive authority.
Jaskowski, Port Sanilac village chief, arrested Petipren during a festival dispute over offensive music at Bark Shanty Festival.
Petipren sued for assault and battery and false arrest; Jaskowski moved for summary disposition arguing absolute immunity under GTLA.
Court of Appeals held executive authority limited to high-level tasks exclusive to the office, denying immunity.
Supreme Court held executive authority includes all authority vested by virtue of the executive position, including acts of ordinary officers; reversible error by Court of Appeals.
Matter remanded for entry of judgment in favor of Jaskowski on Petipren’s claims and for proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether arresting Petipren falls within Jaskowski’s executive authority	Jaskowski acted as an ordinary officer, not within executive scope	Executive authority includes all authority vested in the highest official, including acts of ordinary officers	Yes; Jaskowski is absolutely immune

Ross v Consumers Power Co (On Rehearing), 420 Mich. 567 (1984) (developed framework distinguishing high-level absolute immunity from lower-level qualified immunity)
American Transmissions, Inc. v Attorney General, 454 Mich. 135 (1997) (defines factors for scope of executive authority and rejects sole reliance on ultra vires or governmental-function tests)
Odom v Wayne Co, 482 Mich. 459 (2008) (clarifies immunity standards for negligent acts; separates intentional tort standards from negligent ones)
Marrocco v Raudlett, 431 Mich. 700 (1988) (nonexhaustive factors to determine scope of executive authority)
Payton v Detroit, 211 Mich. App. 375 (1995) (recognizes police chief’s executive authority immunity context)