Michigan
How Cohen v. City of New York applies in Michigan: state-specific rules, key cases, and bar exam notes for Torts.
In Michigan, the principles from 'Cohen v. City of New York' are primarily understood through the lens of negligence and governmental immunity. While Michigan law acknowledges the right to seek damages for emotional distress, it requires a greater showing of duty and breach in cases involving public entities.
Michigan courts apply a more stringent standard for proving claims arising from emotional distress, particularly against governmental entities, requiring a direct impact or physical injury to support such claims.
The court reaffirmed the necessity of a physical injury in claims for emotional distress when involving governmental entities under the governmental immunity act.
This case established that a plaintiff must demonstrate a special relationship to recover for emotional distress in cases where governmental immunity is asserted.
Holding that without physical damage, the claims for emotional distress lacked sufficient grounds to proceed against the entity.
Michigan's approach is generally more restrictive than the federal standard, which can allow for recovery of emotional distress damages even in the absence of physical harm. The requirement for a stronger showing in Michigan particularly limits emotional distress claims against governmental bodies compared to federal case law that may not impose as heavy of a burden.
Candidates should be aware of the stringent requirements for emotional distress claims under Michigan law, especially against public entities, as these principles are frequently tested on the Michigan bar exam.