Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
2 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 8 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Oliver v. Smith.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Oliver v. Smith Anchor | green | “the determination whether a governmental employee's conduct constituted gross negligence under mcl 691.1407 is generally a question of fact, but, if reasonable minds could not differ, a court may grant summary disposition.” | 5 |
| 2 | Radu v. Herndon & Herndon Investigations, Inc. | green | “therefore, a plaintiff cannot survive a motion for summary disposition premised on immunity granted by mcl 691.1407(2) merely by presenting evidence that the employee's conduct amounted to ordinary negligence.” | 3 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.