Donelow v. City of Pontiac

Sixth Circuit

Donelow v. City of Pontiac

933 F.2d 1008, 1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 16790, 1991 WL 88414

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

DecidedMay 28, 1991

Docket90-1876

StatusUnpublished

This text of 933 F.2d 1008 (Donelow v. City of Pontiac) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Donelow v. City of Pontiac, 933 F.2d 1008, 1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 16790, 1991 WL 88414 (6th Cir. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

933 F.2d 1008

Unpublished Disposition
NOTICE: Sixth Circuit Rule 24(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Sixth Circuit.
Thomas W. DONELOW and Deborah Donelow, his wife, Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
The CITY OF PONTIAC, a Michigan municipal corporation and
the Police Department thereof, jointly and
severally, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 90-1876.

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

May 28, 1991.

Before KRUPANSKY and MILBURN, Circuit Judges, and CONTIE, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiffs-appellants, Thomas W. Donelow and Deborah Donelow, his wife, have appealed from the dismissal by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan of this diversity personal injury action against the defendants-appellees, the City of Pontiac, Michigan and its Police Department. The district court concluded that, under Michigan law, the appellees were immune from this type of personal injury suit, and the cause of action was consequently barred.

Upon review of the appellants' assignments of error, the record in its entirety, the briefs of the parties and the arguments of counsel, this court concludes that the district court's judgment was not in error. See Reardon v. Department of Mental Health, 430 Mich. 398, 424 N.W.2d 248 (1988); Hall v. Detroit Bd. of Educ., 186 Mich.App. 469, 465 N.W.2d 12 (Mich.Ct.App.1990); Zielinski v. Szokola, 167 Mich.App. 611, 615, 423 N.W.2d 289, 292 (1988), lv. denied, 432 Mich. 859 (1989); Kuzinski v. Boretti, 182 Mich.App. 177, 451 N.W.2d 859 (1989); Ransburg v. Wayne County, 170 Mich.App. 358, 427 N.W.2d 906 (1988); Hampton v. Master Prods., Inc., 84 Mich.App. 767, 270 N.W.2d 514 (1978). Contra Henkey v. City of Grand Rapids, 185 Mich.App. 56, 460 N.W.2d 271 (1990).

Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

933 F.2d 1008

Unpublished Disposition
NOTICE: Sixth Circuit Rule 24(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Sixth Circuit.
Thomas W. DONELOW and Deborah Donelow, his wife, Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
The CITY OF PONTIAC, a Michigan municipal corporation and
the Police Department thereof, jointly and
severally, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 90-1876.

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

May 28, 1991.

Before KRUPANSKY and MILBURN, Circuit Judges, and CONTIE, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiffs-appellants, Thomas W. Donelow and Deborah Donelow, his wife, have appealed from the dismissal by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan of this diversity personal injury action against the defendants-appellees, the City of Pontiac, Michigan and its Police Department. The district court concluded that, under Michigan law, the appellees were immune from this type of personal injury suit, and the cause of action was consequently barred.

Upon review of the appellants' assignments of error, the record in its entirety, the briefs of the parties and the arguments of counsel, this court concludes that the district court's judgment was not in error. See Reardon v. Department of Mental Health, 430 Mich. 398, 424 N.W.2d 248 (1988); Hall v. Detroit Bd. of Educ., 186 Mich.App. 469, 465 N.W.2d 12 (Mich.Ct.App.1990); Zielinski v. Szokola, 167 Mich.App. 611, 615, 423 N.W.2d 289, 292 (1988), lv. denied, 432 Mich. 859 (1989); Kuzinski v. Boretti, 182 Mich.App. 177, 451 N.W.2d 859 (1989); Ransburg v. Wayne County, 170 Mich.App. 358, 427 N.W.2d 906 (1988); Hampton v. Master Prods., Inc., 84 Mich.App. 767, 270 N.W.2d 514 (1978). Contra Henkey v. City of Grand Rapids, 185 Mich.App. 56, 460 N.W.2d 271 (1990).

Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

933 F.2d 1008, 1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 16790, 1991 WL 88414, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/donelow-v-city-of-pontiac-ca6-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack