William Lanzi v. Township of St Clair
329795
| Mich. Ct. App. | May 23, 2017Background
- Plaintiffs discovered sewage (“grey water”) in their finished basement on Oct. 26–27, 2013; neighbors contacted the mayor who summoned a contractor (Chopp).
- Chopp went to a nearby lift station (~1/4 mile away), manually restarted pumps, and the basement water receded; he reported the lift station’s electric circuit board (SCADA motherboard) had failed.
- Defendant’s sewage system used a SCADA system that monitors lift stations and reports alarms to a master station and can remotely operate pumps; defendant’s expert opined the motherboard failure prevented alarm codes from reaching the master station.
- Plaintiffs sued under (1) negligence, (2) the sewage disposal system event exception to governmental immunity (MCL 691.1417), and (3) an unconstitutional takings claim; defendant moved for summary disposition.
- The trial court granted summary disposition on negligence but denied it as to the MCL 691.1417 claim and allowed the takings claim in the alternative. The Court of Appeals reversed, holding plaintiffs failed to satisfy MCL 691.1417 and that the takings claim was barred as pleaded.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Applicability of sewage-disposal exception (MCL 691.1417(3)(c)) — knowledge of defect | Lanzi: Township should have known a motherboard could fail and should have had backups/monitoring to detect it. | Township: Expert evidence shows motherboard electrical failure prevented alarms; motherboards rarely fail; no notice or prior incidents, so it could not have known or by reasonable diligence known. | Held for Township — plaintiffs offered no evidence to rebut defendant’s expert or show defendant knew or should have known of the defect. |
| MCL 691.1417(3)(d) — failure to take reasonable steps in reasonable time to remedy defect | Lanzi: Defendant failed to have settings/backups that would have prevented the event or mitigate damage. | Township: Once notified, contractor arrived promptly, manually restarted pumps, and a replacement motherboard was installed the same day; response was reasonable and timely. | Held for Township — undisputed prompt corrective action defeated this element; plaintiffs did not show failure to act reasonably. |
| Negligence claim vs. governmental immunity | Lanzi: alleged negligence caused property damage. | Township: governmental immunity bars negligence claim absent an exception. | Trial court had granted summary disposition to Township on negligence; appellate court did not disturb that outcome. |
| Unconstitutional takings (monetary damages against municipality) | Lanzi: physical invasion of sewage constituted a taking requiring compensation under Michigan Constitution. | Township: Monetary claims against a municipality for Michigan Constitution violations are barred where an alternative federal remedy exists. | Held for Township — Jones v. Powell bars municipal constitutional-damages claims when alternative (e.g., § 1983) exists; trial court should have dismissed the takings claim. |
Key Cases Cited
- Beaudrie v. Henderson, 465 Mich. 124 (discussing de novo review of summary disposition and standard)
- Plunkett v. Department of Transportation, 286 Mich. App. 168 (plaintiff must allege facts to invoke exception to governmental immunity; burden-shifting on summary disposition)
- Willett v. Charter Twp. of Waterford, 271 Mich. App. 38 (explaining that plaintiff must prove every element of MCL 691.1417(3))
- Cannon Twp. v. Rockford Pub. Schs., 311 Mich. App. 403 (example where prior similar incidents supported defendant-knowledge element)
- Jones v. Powell, 462 Mich. 329 (municipal monetary damages for Michigan Constitution violations barred where alternative remedy exists)