Supreme Court confirms lower court over-stepped its bounds in dismissing injury victim's case

Several months ago an extremely activist Court of Appeals panel interpreted the governmental immunity rules to preclude any recovery for emotional or psychological damages caused by negligence in the operation of a motor vehicle.  A second Court of Appeals panel was obligated to follow this precedent and held that summary disposition of both a charter township and the University of Michigan was appropriate with regard to the victims' claims of psychological injury. 

This past month, the Supreme Court overturned the Court of Appeals panels who had had applied this "activist" interpretation of the immunity law:  it ruled that it was absurd to suggest that "bodily injury" did not include emotional, psychological or stress damages.