Michigan Supreme Court· 1/22/1985

Ross v. Consumers Power Co.

Citations

363 N.W.2d 641
420 Mich. 567

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

explaining that the justification for affording absolute immunity to certain officials is to protect unfettered decision- making by those “engaged in broad, essential governmental decision-making”
explaining that the justification for affording absolute immunity to certain officials is to protect unfettered decision-making by those “engaged in broad, essential governmental decision-making”
noting “discretionary acts” involve significant decision-making while “ministerial acts” concern the execution of a decision and may only involve “minor decision-making”
noting Michigan inherited its sovereign authority from the British monarch, and “[t]he first rationale [for sovereign immunity] developed from the perception that the sovereign (the king
noting Michigan inherited its sovereign authority from the British monarch, and “the first rationale [for sovereign immunity] developed from the perception that the sovereign (the king
providing a detailed histoiy of sovereign immunity, governmental immunity, and the GTLA

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Levin, Ryan, Brickley, Cavanagh, Boyle, Kavanagh

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

407 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

78 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named Ross v. Consumers Power Co.

3 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.