Michigan
How Calvert v. State of Texas applies in Michigan: state-specific rules, key cases, and bar exam notes for Torts.
Michigan law similarly acknowledges the principles of state liability for actions that arise from the maintenance of highways and public properties. Courts look at the government’s duty to protect citizens from foreseeable harm while balancing public safety and resources.
The state must demonstrate that it has acted reasonably in maintaining public properties and cannot be found liable unless gross negligence rises to a statutory standard.
The court held that a municipality can be held liable for injuries occurring on public highways if they fail to maintain the road in a reasonably safe condition.
Under Michigan’s governmental immunity act, the court determined that the state is not liable for failure to perform a duty, unless gross negligence can be established.
This case affirmed that a state can be held liable if a plaintiff can prove the state's negligence significantly contributed to their injury.
In contrast to federal tort principles, which allow broader interpretations of negligence and duty of care, Michigan imposes specific limitations under its governmental immunity laws. Michigan’s strict standards for proving negligence align closely with the principles articulated in Calvert but diverge regarding governmental liability protections.
Knowledge of Michigan's standards for governmental immunity and public liability is crucial for the bar exam, particularly regarding tort claims against the state.