Case: Guertin v. State of Michigan

5:16-cv-12412 | U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan

Filed Date: June 27, 2016

Case Ongoing

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

This case is one of many filed in response to the 2014 Flint water crisis, which occurred when Flint began to draw corrosive water from the Flint River to save money, exposing thousands to lead and other toxins. On June 27, 2016, a resident of Flint who drank and bathed in lead-contaminated water filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan on behalf of herself and her minor child. (The complaint named, but did not describe, a second individual plaintiff wh…

On June 27, 2016, a resident of Flint who drank and bathed in lead-contaminated water filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan on behalf of herself and her minor child. (The complaint named, but did not describe, a second individual plaintiff who was also a resident of Flint exposed to unsafe water.) The plaintiffs, represented by private counsel, sued the City of Flint, the State of Michigan, and various government officials and private contractors under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and state law. They sought general, compensatory and punitive damages, an order declaring the defendants’ conduct unconstitutional, equitable relief to remediate the harm they had suffered, and attorneys’ fees. The plaintiffs claimed that the defendants’ failure to provide safe drinking water and their provision of deliberate misinformation about the safety of the drinking water violated their due process and common law rights.

Specifically, the plaintiffs claimed that the defendants knew the water was contaminated yet continued to publicly state the water was safe. By doing so, the plaintiffs claimed that the defendants showed deliberate indifference to their bodily integrity and property rights, breached their contract to provide safe water, breached the implied warranty that the water they sold was safe, and interfered with the plaintiffs’ ability to enjoy their home, which constituted a nuisance. In addition, the plaintiffs alleged that the defendants’ failure to adequately test the water was negligent, and the failure to provide safe drinking water was grossly negligent.

The case was assigned to Judge Judith E. Levy. On October 27, 2016, the defendants moved to change venue, arguing that the overwhelming extent of adverse media coverage would make a fair and impartial jury nearly impossible in the Eastern District of Michigan. The defendants requested a venue change to an out of state metropolitan venue or the Northern Division of the Western District of Michigan, which they claimed was the least prejudicial venue in Michigan.

In the following weeks, all defendants moved to dismiss the action and argued that the plaintiffs failed to state a claim. Some defendants who were government officials sued in their official capacities raised immunity defenses and argued that the proprietary function exception to governmental immunity did not apply to the sale of water.

On January 23, 2017, the court denied the motion to change venue. The court noted that plaintiffs can ordinarily choose the venue, the majority of the defendants lived nearby, and most of the evidence was in the area. It determined that a venue change so far before trial would be premature. 2017 WL 6390962.

On June 5, 2017, the court granted in part and denied in part the motions to dismiss. Judge Levy dismissed the plaintiffs’ breach of contract, breach of implied warranty, nuisance, trespass, gross negligence, professional negligence, intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED), and negligent infliction of emotional distress (NIED) claims. She also dismissed the plaintiff’s due process claims that related to property loss and state-created danger, as well as the plaintiffs’ bodily integrity claims as to the government defendants and officials acting within their official capacities. The court also declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the plaintiffs’ unjust enrichment claim. But the plaintiffs’ bodily integrity claims against officials acting in their individual capacities survived because the court determined the alleged conduct of the governmental defendants was so egregious as to shock the conscience and violate the plaintiffs’ clearly established fundamental right to bodily integrity; the court accordingly denied the defendants’ claims to qualified immunity on this count. The plaintiffs’ ordinary negligence claims against the contractors also survived. 2017 WL 2418007.

Meanwhile, Judge Levy indicated that she planned to consolidate all of the class action cases arising from the Flint water crisis. In this case, the plaintiffs moved for leave to add class allegations and to consolidate with the other class actions on June 23, 2017.

On July 27, 2017, Judge Levy consolidated eight class actions (16-cv-10796, 16-cv-11173, 16-cv-11247, 16-cv-12875, 16-cv-14498, 17-cv-10343, 17-cv-10360, and 17-cv-10799) with Waid v. Snyder (later captioned In re Flint Water Cases). But she declined to consolidate this case, likely because it was not originally filed as a class action.

Litigation also continued over the court’s decision on the motions to dismiss. Various government officials appealed the district court’s June 5, 2017 decision denying them qualified immunity, and district court proceedings were stayed on October 30, 2017 while the appeals proceeded. 2017 WL 4875618. The Sixth Circuit (Judges Griffin and White, with Judge McKeague dissenting in part) largely affirmed the district court on January 4, 2019. The Sixth Circuit agreed that the plaintiffs had stated a claim for harm to bodily integrity against officials who were not entitled to qualified immunity, although it dismissed the claims against other officials against whom the plaintiffs had alleged only negligence. The Sixth Circuit also determined that Flint was not an “arm of the state,” which could have conferred additional immunity on some officials, despite the city being run by an emergency manager. 912 F.3d 907. The appellate court denied a petition for rehearing en banc. 912 F.3d 907.

The case returned to the district court, but on August 14, 2019, the City of Flint filed a petition for a writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of the United States. The city challenged the Sixth Circuit's decision to expand the right to bodily integrity to protection from exposure to environmental toxins. The city also requested review of whether it was plausible that the decisions of government officials acting with the approval of regulatory enforcers and the advice of experts can be found to be conscience-shocking. For the claim against the city defendants to pass the Twombly plausibility standard, the plaintiffs must have shown how the government’s discretionary conduct that deprived them of a constitutionally protected liberty interest was constitutionally repugnant. To do this, the plaintiffs must have alleged conduct that was "conscience shocking". Additionally, the city asked the Supreme Court to decide if there was a clearly established constitutional right. The city argued that even if a bodily integrity violation occurred, it was not clearly established. Finally, the city challenged the ruling that a municipality under complete control of the state is not an "arm of the state" and consequently not entitled to Eleventh Amendment immunity. On January 21, 2020, the Supreme Court denied the petition for a writ of certiorari and declined to hear the case. Supreme Court Case No. 19-205.

After the denial of certiorari, the parties held status conferences at the district court level from March 2020 through January 2022. On March 9, 2022, the court entered a final judgment and order of dismissal with prejudice, implementing a partial settlement for all cases related to the Flint water crisis, including Guertin and others which had not been filed as class actions. For details of the settlement, see In re Flint Water Cases in the Clearinghouse.

On December 21, 2022, Judge Levy consolidated all 90 pending Flint water crisis-related civil cases and captioned them In re Flint Water Cases for pre-trial purposes and ordered that all further filings be docketed on the lead docket, but the docket in this case remained open.

	Document
5:16-cv-12412	Docket [PACER]	May 20, 2020	May 20, 2020 Docket
1 5:16-cv-12412	Complaint and Jury Demand	June 27, 2016	June 27, 2016 Complaint
45 5:16-cv-12412	MDEQ Defendants' Motion for Change of Venue Oral Argument Requested	Oct. 27, 2016	Oct. 27, 2016 Pleading / Motion / Brief
113 5:16-cv-12412	Opinion and Order Denying Motion to Change Venue [45] Without Prejudice	Jan. 23, 2017	Jan. 23, 2017 Order/Opinion 2017 WL 6390962
126 5:16-cv-12412	Opinion and Order Denying the MDEQ Employee Defendants' Motion for Reconsideration [116]	Feb. 9, 2017	Feb. 9, 2017 Order/Opinion 2017 WL 6402993
151 5:16-cv-12412	Opinion and Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Defendants' Motion to Dismiss [50, 52, 59, 69, 70, 96, 102, 103, 105]	June 5, 2017	June 5, 2017 Order/Opinion 2017 WL 2418007
191 5:16-cv-12412	Opinion and Order Granting Defendant Veolla's Motion for Reconsideration [155], Denying Defendant Wyant's Motion for Reconsideration [159], and Granting Defendant Lockwood's Motion for Reconsideration [160]	July 14, 2017	July 14, 2017 Order/Opinion 2017 WL 2991768
215 5:16-cv-12412	Opinion and Order Granting Defendants' Motions to Stay [166, 169, 173]	Oct. 30, 2017	Oct. 30, 2017 Order/Opinion 2017 WL 4875618
240 5:16-cv-12412 17-01698 17-01699 17-01745 17-01752 17-01769	Opinion U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit	Jan. 4, 2019	Jan. 4, 2019 Order/Opinion 912 F.3d 907
291 5:16-cv-12412	Amended Final Judgment and Order of Dismissal	March 9, 2022	March 9, 2022 Order/Opinion

ECF Number	Description	Date	Link Date / Link
1	COMPLAINT filed by All Plaintiffs against All Defendants with Jury Demand. Plaintiff requests summons issued. Receipt No: 0645-5756718 - Fee: $ 400. County of 1st Plaintiff: Genesee - County Where Action Arose: Genesee - County of 1st Defendant: Ingham. [Previously dismissed case: No] [Possible companion case(s): None] (Hart, David) (Entered: 06/27/2016)	June 27, 2016	June 27, 2016 RECAP
	Notice to Parties of Consent of a Civil Action before a Magistrate Judge Option	June 27, 2016	June 27, 2016 PACER
2	SUMMONS Issued for * All Defendants * (SOso) (Entered: 06/27/2016)	June 27, 2016	June 27, 2016 PACER
	A United States Magistrate Judge of this Court is available to conduct all proceedings in this civil action in accordance with 28 U.S.C. 636c and FRCP 73. The Notice, Consent, and Reference of a Civil Action to a Magistrate Judge form is available for download at http://www.mied.uscourts.gov (SOso)	June 27, 2016	June 27, 2016 PACER
3	ATTORNEY APPEARANCE: Philip A. Grashoff, Jr appearing on behalf of Stephen Busch w/Certificate of Service (Grashoff, Philip) (Entered: 09/09/2016)	Sept. 9, 2016	Sept. 9, 2016 PACER
4	ATTORNEY APPEARANCE: Dennis K. Egan appearing on behalf of Stephen Busch w/Certificate of Service (Egan, Dennis) (Entered: 09/09/2016)	Sept. 9, 2016	Sept. 9, 2016 PACER
5	ATTORNEY APPEARANCE: Courtney B. Ciullo appearing on behalf of Stephen Busch w/Certificate of Service (Ciullo, Courtney) (Entered: 09/09/2016)	Sept. 9, 2016	Sept. 9, 2016 PACER
6	NOTICE of Appearance by Michael J. Pattwell on behalf of Daniel Wyant. (Pattwell, Michael) (Entered: 09/12/2016)	Sept. 12, 2016	Sept. 12, 2016 PACER
7	NOTICE of Appearance by Michael J. Pattwell on behalf of Bradley Wurfel. (Pattwell, Michael) (Entered: 09/12/2016)	Sept. 12, 2016	Sept. 12, 2016 PACER
8	NOTICE of Appearance by Jordan S. Bolton on behalf of Daniel Wyant. (Bolton, Jordan) (Entered: 09/12/2016)	Sept. 12, 2016	Sept. 12, 2016 PACER
9	NOTICE of Appearance by Stacy Erwin Oakes on behalf of Gerald Ambrose, Howard Croft, Darnell Earley, Flint, City of, Michael Glasgow. (Erwin Oakes, Stacy) (Entered: 09/15/2016)	Sept. 15, 2016	Sept. 15, 2016 PACER
10	NOTICE of Appearance by William Young Kim on behalf of Gerald Ambrose, Howard Croft, Darnell Earley, Flint, City of, Michael Glasgow. (Kim, William) (Entered: 09/15/2016)	Sept. 15, 2016	Sept. 15, 2016 PACER
11	[STRICKEN] NOTICE of Appearance by Reed E. Eriksson on behalf of Gerald Ambrose, Howard Croft, Darnell Earley, Flint, City of, Michael Glasgow. (Eriksson, Reed) Modified on 9/15/2016 (FMos).[LINKED TO INCORRECT PARTY] (Entered: 09/15/2016)	Sept. 15, 2016	Sept. 15, 2016 PACER
12	NOTICE of Appearance by Reed E. Eriksson on behalf of Gerald Ambrose, Howard Croft, Darnell Earley, Flint, City of, Michael Glasgow. (Eriksson, Reed) (Entered: 09/15/2016)	Sept. 15, 2016	Sept. 15, 2016 PACER
13	NOTICE of Appearance by Christopher B. Clare on behalf of Bradley Wurfel, Daniel Wyant. (Clare, Christopher) (Entered: 09/15/2016)	Sept. 15, 2016	Sept. 15, 2016 PACER
14	WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed. Bradley Wurfel waiver sent on 9/12/2016, answer due 11/14/2016. (Hart, David) (Entered: 09/16/2016)	Sept. 16, 2016	Sept. 16, 2016 PACER
15	WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed. Flint, City of waiver sent on 9/13/2016, answer due 11/14/2016. (Hart, David) Modified on 9/19/2016 (DWor). [WAIVER SENT ON 8/31/16] (Entered: 09/16/2016)	Sept. 16, 2016	Sept. 16, 2016 PACER
16	WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed. Daniel Wyant waiver sent on 9/12/2016, answer due 11/14/2016. (Hart, David) Modified on 9/19/2016 (DWor). [WAIVER SENT ON 9/2/16] (Entered: 09/16/2016)	Sept. 16, 2016	Sept. 16, 2016 PACER
17	WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed. Darnell Earley waiver sent on 8/31/2016, answer due 10/31/2016. (Hart, David) (Entered: 09/16/2016)	Sept. 16, 2016	Sept. 16, 2016 PACER
18	WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed. Gerald Ambrose waiver sent on 8/31/2016, answer due 10/31/2016. (Hart, David) (Entered: 09/16/2016)	Sept. 16, 2016	Sept. 16, 2016 PACER
19	WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed. Howard Croft waiver sent on 8/31/2016, answer due 10/31/2016. (Hart, David) (Entered: 09/16/2016)	Sept. 16, 2016	Sept. 16, 2016 PACER
20	WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed. Michael Glasgow waiver sent on 8/31/2016, answer due 10/31/2016. (Hart, David) (Entered: 09/16/2016)	Sept. 16, 2016	Sept. 16, 2016 PACER
21	WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed. Veolia North America, LLC waiver sent on 8/31/2016, answer due 10/31/2016. (Hart, David) (Entered: 09/16/2016)	Sept. 16, 2016	Sept. 16, 2016 PACER
22	WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed. Stephen Busch waiver sent on 9/13/2016, answer due 11/14/2016. (Hart, David) Modified on 9/21/2016 (DWor). [WAIVER MAILED ON 12/6/16] (Entered: 09/20/2016)	Sept. 20, 2016	Sept. 20, 2016 PACER
23	STIPULATION for Entry of Order to Extend Deadline to File a Response to Complaint by Nick Lyon, Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, Michigan Department of Health and Human Services, Michigan, State of, Richard Snyder, Eden Wells (Bettenhausen, Margaret) (Entered: 09/21/2016)	Sept. 21, 2016	Sept. 21, 2016 PACER
24	ATTORNEY APPEARANCE: Margaret A. Bettenhausen appearing on behalf of Nick Lyon, Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, Michigan Department of Health and Human Services, Michigan, State of, Richard Snyder, Eden Wells (Bettenhausen, Margaret) (Entered: 09/21/2016)	Sept. 21, 2016	Sept. 21, 2016 PACER
25	ATTORNEY APPEARANCE: Richard S. Kuhl appearing on behalf of Nick Lyon, Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, Michigan Department of Health and Human Services, Michigan, State of, Richard Snyder, Eden Wells (Kuhl, Richard) (Entered: 09/21/2016)	Sept. 21, 2016	Sept. 21, 2016 PACER
26	ATTORNEY APPEARANCE: Nathan A. Gambill appearing on behalf of Nick Lyon, Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, Michigan Department of Health and Human Services, Michigan, State of, Richard Snyder, Eden Wells (Gambill, Nathan) (Entered: 09/22/2016)	Sept. 22, 2016	Sept. 22, 2016 PACER
27	STIPULATED ORDER to Extend Deadline to File a Response to 1 Complaint - ( Response due by 12/6/2016) - Signed by District Judge Judith E. Levy. (FMos) (Entered: 09/22/2016)	Sept. 22, 2016	Sept. 22, 2016 PACER
28	ATTORNEY APPEARANCE: Zachary C. Larsen appearing on behalf of Nick Lyon, Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, Michigan Department of Health and Human Services, Michigan, State of, Richard Snyder, Eden Wells (Larsen, Zachary) (Entered: 09/22/2016)	Sept. 22, 2016	Sept. 22, 2016 PACER
29	NOTICE of Appearance by Frederick A. Berg on behalf of Flint, City of. (Berg, Frederick) (Entered: 09/22/2016)	Sept. 22, 2016	Sept. 22, 2016 PACER
30	NOTICE of Appearance by Sheldon H. Klein on behalf of Flint, City of. (Klein, Sheldon) (Entered: 09/22/2016)	Sept. 22, 2016	Sept. 22, 2016 PACER
31	WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed. Lockwood, Andrews & Newnam, Inc. waiver sent on 9/8/2016, answer due 11/7/2016. (Hart, David) (Entered: 09/23/2016)	Sept. 23, 2016	Sept. 23, 2016 PACER
32	NOTICE of Appearance by Krista A. Jackson on behalf of Stephen Busch. (Jackson, Krista) (Entered: 09/26/2016)	Sept. 26, 2016	Sept. 26, 2016 PACER
33	NOTICE of Appearance by Jay M. Berger on behalf of Bradley Wurfel, Daniel Wyant. (Berger, Jay) (Entered: 09/27/2016)	Sept. 27, 2016	Sept. 27, 2016 PACER
34	NOTICE of Appearance by Charles E. Barbieri on behalf of Patrick Cook, Michael Prysby. (Barbieri, Charles) (Entered: 09/29/2016)	Sept. 29, 2016	Sept. 29, 2016 PACER
35	NOTICE of Appearance by Allison M. Collins on behalf of Patrick Cook, Michael Prysby. (Collins, Allison) (Entered: 09/29/2016)	Sept. 29, 2016	Sept. 29, 2016 PACER
36	WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed. Patrick Cook waiver sent on 9/20/2016, answer due 11/21/2016. (Hart, David) (Entered: 10/03/2016)	Oct. 3, 2016	Oct. 3, 2016 PACER
37	WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed. Michael Prysby waiver sent on 9/20/2016, answer due 11/21/2016. (Hart, David) (Entered: 10/03/2016)	Oct. 3, 2016	Oct. 3, 2016 PACER
38	NOTICE of Appearance by Philip A. Erickson on behalf of Lockwood, Andrews & Newnam, Inc.. (Erickson, Philip) (Entered: 10/11/2016)	Oct. 11, 2016	Oct. 11, 2016 PACER

Case: Guertin v. State of Michigan

5:16-cv-12412 | U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan

Case Summary

People

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Docket

Case Details