Court Opinion

ID: 9687919
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 16:53:23.771372+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:18:32.923887
License: Public Domain

Dethmers, J.
(concurring). I concur with and am signing the opinion of Mr. Justice Thomas M. Kavanagh in this cause, overruling the so-called “impact” rule in emotional distress cases heretofore followed by this Court.
I should like, however, to add a few words, in the interests of clarity, with respect to the retrospective effect of this decision.
This overruling decision is to be given retrospective effect, inasmuch as neither impairment of the obligations of contracts nor injurious affecting of vested rights, under earlier decisions, is involved. The overruled decisions, of course, remain the law of the ease with respect to the particular cases in which rendered. Donohue v. Russell (1933), 264 Mich 217. As in Bricker v. Green (1946), 313 Mich 218, this overruling decision applies to this case and to all “pending and future eases”. This does not limit the applicability of this decision to cases in which the cause of action accrues after the date of filing this decision, but includes all cases in which trial or appeal occurs after that date.
Black and T. G. Kavanagh, JJ., concurred with Dethmers, J.