Mich. Comp. Laws § 28.5

Repealed. 2006, Act 190, Imd. Eff. June 19, 2006.

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

MICHIGAN STATE POLICE

Act 59 of 1935

28.5 Repealed. 2006, Act 190, Imd. Eff. June 19, 2006.

Repealed. 2006, Act 190, Imd. Eff. June 19, 2006.

Compiler's Notes:

The repealed section pertained to transfer of certain departments and offices to Michigan state police.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 7 cases, 1972–2019 · leading case: Owens v. Allis-Chalmers Corp.

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Owens v. Allis-Chalmers Corp. (1982) mich · cites it 2× “Thus, if the product is a carrot-topping machine with exposed moving parts, or an electric clothes wringer dangerous to the limbs of the operator, and if it would be feasible for the maker of the product to install a guard or a safety release, it should be a question for the…”

Glittenberg v. Doughboy Recreational Industries (1992) mich · cites it 2× “[21] See 5 Harper, James & Gray, Torts (2d ed), § 28.5, p 356: The sharpness of knives and axes, or the tendency of unpacked fresh meat to spoil are so notorious that a warning could be expected to add nothing useful to the perception gained from one's senses and the knowledge…”

Hill v. Clark Equipment Co. (1972) michctapp · cites it 2× “” 2 Harper & James, Law of Torts, § 28.5, pp 1542-1544. 14 Hill was obliged to use the forklift truck in his employment.”

Convergent Group Corp. v. County of Kent (2003) miwd “(Implementation Agreement § 28.5.) The Support Agreement contains a similar merger clause.”

Byrnes v. Economic MacHinery Co. (1972) michctapp “Gossett v Chrysler Corp, 359 F2d 84 (CA 6, 1966); Farr v Wheeler Manufacturing Corp, 24 Mich App 379 (1970); Harper & James, The Law of Torts (1956), § 28.5, pp 1543, 1545. This may even include misuse which may be reasonably anticipated.”

Carlson v. Bic Corp. (1993) mied “2d 571 (quoting 2 Harper & James, Torts, § 28.5) (emphasis added). This analysis was adopted by the Michigan Supreme Court in Owens , where the court determined that obviousness of the danger is not dispositive in a design defect case: As in Fisher , the obviousness of the risks…”

Gary Jackson v. Department of corrections/director (2019) michctapp “Martin, 214 Mich App at 411, 414 (noting that judicial review of an administrative decision may be precluded “where constitutional rights are not implicated” and concluding that the minor misconduct charge at issue “did not affect private rights or licenses”), citing Const 1963,…”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.