Police Brutality & Civil Rights
Related Civil Liability
4 statutes with plain-language summaries, case relevance, source links, and related Michigan practice areas.
Statutory text checked against the Michigan Compiled Laws, complete through PA 16 of 2026, on June 12, 2026.
Related Civil Liability
4 statutes"A civil action for malpractice may be maintained against any person professing or holding himself out to be a member of a state licensed profession." The statute also provides that common-law malpractice rules apply to a person who holds himself or herself out as a member of a state licensed profession.Read Full Statute
MCL 600.2912 applies to malpractice actions against people who profess or hold themselves out as members of a state licensed profession. It is not a standalone police-misconduct standard of care.
This statute may be relevant only if a civil-rights matter includes a separate licensed-professional malpractice theory. Ordinary police negligence, gross negligence, intentional tort, and federal constitutional claims require separate legal analysis.
We separate constitutional claims, intentional torts, governmental-immunity issues, and any licensed-professional malpractice theory so the case is pleaded under the correct legal framework.
"Actions may be brought by and against a married woman as if she were unmarried." This is not the rule for naming police departments, municipalities, officers, or state agencies as defendants.Read Full Statute
MCL 600.2001 is a narrow married-women capacity statute, not the rule that decides whether a police department, municipality, officer, or state agency can be sued. Defendant naming usually turns on court rules, municipal structure, state-entity status, immunity, and the claim being pleaded.
A police department may not be a separate suable entity from its municipality, while officers, cities, counties, and state agencies can raise different forum and immunity issues. The caption must be built from the actual defendant's legal status.
We identify the officer, employer, municipal or state entity, and official-capacity or individual-capacity theory before filing so the right defendants are named in the right court.
"A person shall not engage in a course of conduct involving repeated or continuing harassment of another individual that would cause a reasonable individual to feel terrorized, frightened, intimidated, threatened, harassed, or molested, and that actually causes the victim to feel terrorized, frightened, intimidated, threatened, harassed, or molested."Read Full Statute
Michigan's stalking statutes prohibit repeated, unwanted following or harassment that would cause a reasonable person to feel terrorized or intimidated. When police officers engage in targeted, retaliatory harassment of a civilian without legitimate law enforcement purpose, the stalking statute may provide an additional civil remedy.
Retaliatory police conduct — repeated stops, surveillance, harassment, and intimidation of activists or whistleblowers — can constitute criminal stalking and support civil claims for intentional infliction of emotional distress and civil rights violations.
We document patterns of police targeting and harassment to establish civil stalking claims alongside § 1983 civil rights claims in cases involving retaliatory or politically motivated law enforcement conduct.
"A victim may maintain a civil action against an individual who engages in conduct that is prohibited under section 411h or 411i" for damages from stalking conduct. A victim may also seek exemplary damages, costs, and reasonable attorney fees under the statute.Read Full Statute
MCL 600.2954 allows a stalking victim to bring a civil action against an individual who engages in conduct prohibited by MCL 750.411h or 750.411i. It allows damages, exemplary damages, costs, and reasonable attorney fees, whether or not the individual was charged or convicted.
This is not a general civil action for any criminal conduct and it does not create treble damages. It can matter in targeted harassment, surveillance, or retaliation patterns that fit Michigan's stalking statutes.
We pair this statute with stalking evidence only when the facts support repeated prohibited harassment, while pleading other police-misconduct claims under their own statutes and constitutional theories.