distinguishing intentional, negligent omissions from intentional, negligent commissions
How later courts described this case
- distinguishing intentional, negligent omissions from intentional, negligent commissions
Written by the judges who cited it.
Distinguished
Distinguished by Chapin v. Coloma Township, 163 Mich. App. 614 (1987)
We also distinguish Velmer on the ground that the dangerous condition in that case was latent.
The opinion
Cynar, J.
(concurring in part and dissenting in part). I agree concerning the intentional nuisance exception that the factual basis presented does not *503 support plaintiffs claim of intentionally created nuisance.
However, I must respectfully dissent with the majority holding on the defective building exception issue. It can hardly be construed that reliance on Green v Dep’t of Corrections, 30 Mich App 648 ; 186 NW2d 792 (1971), aff'd 386 Mich 459 ; 192 NW2d 491 (1971), in the case before us amounts to stretching a holding beyond its applicability. While the milling machine in Green was anchored securely to the floor, the weight of the machine in this matter affixed the machine to the floor, perhaps even more securely. I would hold the trial court erred in granting summary disposition on this issue.