EDDIE DANIELS V PAUL PETERSON

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS EDDIE DANIELS and FAYE DANIELS, UNPUBLISHED Plaintiffs-Appellants, v No. 173275 Ingham Circuit Court LC No. 93-74802-NO PAUL PETERSON and DONALD RIEL, Defendants-Appellees. Before: MacKenzie, P.J., and Saad and C. F. Youngblood*, JJ. YOUNGBLOOD, J. (dissenting). I respectfully dissent under the facts of this case. The special relationship test applies to police officers and firefighters. White v Beasley, 453 Mich 308; 552 NW2d 1 (1996); Gazette v Pontiac, 212 Mich App 162, 170; 536 NW2d 854 (1995); Jones v Wilcox, 190 Mich App 564, 568-570; 476 NW2d 473 (1991); Markis v Grosse Pointe Park, 180 Mich App 545, 558; 448 NW2d 352 (1989). Here, defendants were employed by the Michigan Department of Transportation and assigned to the railroad safety and tariff’s division. They were aware of a dangerous condition based on their personal inspection of the accident site, but failed to issue a required report. They had a duty to act within their assigned duties, and that duty ran to all citizens using that intersection. This was a known danger at a particular location, completely different than situations involving crime and fires. Plaintiffs properly alleged gross negligence and provided sufficient proofs to go to a jury. Summary disposition should have been denied. /s/ Carole F. Youngblood * Circuit judge, sitting on the Court of Appeals by assignment. -1

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.