Summary
In Eberhard, this Court found a public school not liable for an injury that resulted from a defective basketball hoop in the school's playground.
Summary of this case from Richardson v. Warren Consolidated School DistrictOpinion
Docket No. 129039.
Decided May 21, 1991, at 9:10 A.M. Leave to appeal sought.
William A. Spiers, for the plaintiff.
Kluczynski, Girtz Vogelzang (by William Vogelzang, Jr., and Ella S. Parker), for the defendant.
Before: WEAVER, P.J., and MacKENZIE and GRIBBS, JJ.
Plaintiff appeals as of right from a circuit court order granting defendant's motion for summary disposition on the bases of governmental immunity and lack of a genuine issue of material fact. MCR 2.116(C)(7), (10). We affirm.
Plaintiff Daniel J. Eberhard, a twelve-year-old child, was injured playing basketball on the Perrin-Palmer Elementary School playground. The basketball hoop fell and struck the child.
The broad construction of the public building exception to governmental immunity, MCL 691.1406; MSA 3.996(106), urged by plaintiff does not comport with Reardon v Dep't of Mental Health, 430 Mich. 398; 424 N.W.2d 248 (1988). The scope of the exception is now narrowly drawn. The duty imposed by the public building exception relates to dangers actually presented by the building itself. Wing v Detroit, 178 Mich. App. 628, 631; 444 N.W.2d 539 (1989); Dew v Livonia, 180 Mich. App. 676, 679; 447 N.W.2d 764 (1989); Yarrick v Village of Kent City, 180 Mich. App. 410, 414; 447 N.W.2d 803 (1989).
In this case, plaintiff relies primarily on Pichette v Manistique Public Schools, 403 Mich. 268; 269 N.W.2d 143 (1978). Pichette was decided before Ross v Consumers Power Co (On Rehearing), 420 Mich. 567, 618; 363 N.W.2d 641 (1984). When our Supreme Court reconsidered the building exception in Reardon, it specifically noted Pichette and other cases and concluded that "[t]he rather broad statement of the legislative purpose contained in the above cases could be explained by the fact that they were all decided prior to Ross". Reardon, supra at 413.
We are convinced that the public building exception no longer applies to dangers presented on school property adjacent to a public school building. Hall v Detroit Bd of Ed, 186 Mich. App. 469; 465 N.W.2d 12 (1990).
Affirmed.