Opinion

Stringwell v. Ann Arbor Public School District

  • 262 Mich. App. 709
  • 686 N.W.2d 825
  • 2004 Mich. App. LEXIS 1865
Court
Michigan Court of Appeals
Filed
Jul 6, 2004
Status
Published
Author
Connell
On the bench
Connell, Donofrio, Hoekstra
Cited by
14 cases
Authority
More cited than 2.7%

The opinion

O’CONNELL, J.

(dissenting.) I respectfully dissent. The trial court dismissed this cause of action because it implicitly found that the student who started the vehicle was not an “officer, agent, or employee” of the school district. The record establishes that a teacher for *715 the school told the student to start the vehicle so that the class could check the vehicle’s fluid levels. Because the student acted at the direction of the teacher and used the vehicle with the teacher’s permission, the student acted as an agent of the school district. Roberts v Lundy, 301 Mich 726, 729 ; 4 NW2d 74 (1942). Because this incident fell within the automobile exception to governmental immunity, the trial court erred when it granted summary disposition to the school district. MCL 691.1405. I would reverse.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.