Ray Chaney v. Michigan Department

Opinion BEFORE THE ENTIRE BENCH BRICKLEY, J. This case asks us to decide whether the highway exception to governmental immunity 1 encompasses a concrete bridge abutment and adjoining guardrail adjacent to, but beyond the shoulder of, a state trunkline entrance ramp and overpass. The Court of Appeals relied upon our plurality opinion in Scheurman v Dep't of Transportation, 434 Mich 619; 456 NW2d 66 (1990), to reverse the Court of Claims denial of defendant's motion for summary Disposition. While we agree with the result reached by the Court of Appeals, we do not fully endorse its rationale. 198 Mich App 728; 499 NW2d 29 (1993). We hold that because the abutment and guardrail are neither part of ""the improved portion of the highway designed for vehicular travel,"" nor installations integrally and directly affecting safe vehicular travel upon the improved portion, governmental immunity bars the cause of action set forth in plaintiff's complaint.