Thomas G. Kavanagh

This case concerned whether Michigan's Hazardous Waste Management Act preempted a local zoning ordinance that barred construction of a hazardous waste processing facility on land zoned for extractive use in Groveland Township. The dispute arose after Stablex sought to build a plant to treat toxic waste and use the resulting material to reclaim a former gravel mining site, relying on a prior consent judgment that required filling the excavated areas with inorganic material. The trial court ruled in favor of Stablex, but the Court of Appeals reversed, holding that the facility was not a permitted use under the zoning ordinance and that the consent judgment did not override those restrictions. The Michigan Supreme Court affirmed, concluding that the Act does not preempt local land-use regulations and that the proposed plant must comply with the township's zoning ordinance.

environmentbusiness & regulatoryproperty

In People v. Jones, the defendant was charged with first-degree murder and felony-firearm in connection with a fatal shooting; the jury convicted him of second-degree murder and felony-firearm. The Court of Appeals reversed, finding error in the trial court's failure to instruct the jury on involuntary manslaughter. The Michigan Supreme Court affirmed the reversal, holding that the given instructions did not fully and fairly present the case to the jury. Although the defendant did not explicitly claim accident at trial, evidence including his statements to his girlfriend supported the possibility that the shooting was unintentional, and the judge's sua sponte instruction on voluntary manslaughter required a corresponding instruction on involuntary manslaughter to allow the jury to consider a criminal-negligence theory. The court noted that without any manslaughter instruction there would have been no reversible error, but once manslaughter was addressed the instructions could not omit the defense theory.

criminal lawprocedure

This case involved two defendants convicted of driving while impaired after police found them asleep in stationary vehicles with engines running, one legally parked and the other partially in a ditch. The Michigan Supreme Court considered whether an intoxicated person asleep in the driver’s seat of a motionless car qualifies as "operating" a vehicle under MCL 257.625b and parallel local ordinances, which define an operator as one in actual physical control of a motor vehicle. The court held that under any reasonable reading of the statute, sleeping in a motionless car does not constitute operating the vehicle at the time of arrest. The core reasoning focused on the statutory language requiring present operation or control, distinguishing the facts from scenarios where a car is in motion or the driver is awake, and noted the absence of evidence of prior impaired driving in one case.

criminal law

In Clifford v. Cactus Drilling Corp., an at-will employee sued his employer after being fired for missing work due to a recurrence of pain from a prior work-related injury, for which he had already received workers' compensation benefits. The Michigan Supreme Court held that the employee's complaint did not state a valid public policy exception to the employment-at-will doctrine. The court reasoned that while retaliatory discharge for filing a workers' compensation claim violates public policy, as established in prior precedent, discharge for absence due to injury does not necessarily chill the employee's statutory rights under the Workers' Disability Compensation Act. The decision reversed the Court of Appeals and reinstated the trial court's summary judgment for the defendant.

labor & employment

This case involved plaintiffs suing the Sanilac County Road Commission for personal injuries from a collision between their truck and a county-owned vehicle spreading salt on a state trunk line highway, with claims including negligent operation of the motor vehicle. The trial court granted summary judgment to the defendant on grounds of statutory immunity under MCL 250.61 for counties performing highway maintenance, and the Court of Appeals affirmed. The Michigan Supreme Court reversed, ruling that county road commissions are liable for the negligent operation of their motor vehicles even when engaged in construction, improvement, or maintenance of state highways. The court reasoned that the later governmental immunity statute, MCL 691.1405, which specifically imposes liability on governmental agencies for negligent motor vehicle operation, controls over and creates an exception to the earlier statute relieving counties of such liabilities.

torts & liability

In Morris v. Metriyakool, consolidated with Jackson v. Detroit Memorial Hospital, the Michigan Supreme Court addressed challenges to the Medical Malpractice Arbitration Act of 1975, which permits patients to agree to arbitrate malpractice claims against hospitals and providers rather than litigate in court. Plaintiffs argued that the required three-member arbitration panels—an attorney as chair, a physician or hospital administrator, and a layperson—created an unconstitutional risk of bias, violating due process rights to an impartial decisionmaker, and that the agreements were unconscionable or contracts of adhesion. The Court upheld the Act's constitutionality, ruling that the agreements are voluntary with 60-day revocation periods and explicit notices that arbitration is not required for treatment, and that the panel composition does not inherently deprive claimants of impartiality under the Due Process Clause. The decisions below granting motions to compel arbitration were affirmed.

civil rightsprocedurehealthcaretorts & liability