Mays v. Governor of Michigan
Michigan Supreme Court
954 N.W.2d 139 (2020)

- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
The State of Michigan (defendant) switched the water source for residents of Flint from the Detroit Water and Sewerage Department to the Flint River. Stemming from this switch, Melissa and Michael Mays and other Flint property owners (collectively, Mays) (plaintiffs) filed a class-action suit against Michigan. Mays claimed inverse condemnation and violation of Mays’s rights to bodily integrity under the state’s due-process clause. Mays alleged that the water from the Flint River caused physical harm to residents and decreased Flint property values, that the state had been warned by local officials that the Flint water-treatment plant was not suitable to handle the switch and that the water coming from the river was contaminated and not suitable for drinking, and that the state hid its knowledge of the safety of the river water from the public. The state moved for summary judgment. The court of claims denied the motion. The court of appeals affirmed. Michigan appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Bernstein, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.