"[I]t is our opinion based on Quern and decisions of other states that the term 'person’ in § 1983 was not intended to include states and state agencies”
How later courts described this case
- "[I]t is our opinion based on Quern and decisions of other states that the term 'person’ in § 1983 was not intended to include states and state agencies”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
J. H. Gillis, P.J.
(concurring in part and dissenting in part). I disagree with the majority’s conclusion that the state is not a "person” for purposes of 42 USC 1983. Rather, I would adopt the reasoning advanced by Judge Wahls in Karchefske v Dep’t of Mental Health, 143 Mich App 1 ; 371 NW2d 876 (1985), on this point. However, because I agree that this action against the state is precluded on the grounds of governmental immunity, Ross v Consumers Power Co, 420 Mich 567 ; 363 NW2d 641 (1985), I concur in the reversal.