## Facts

- Thirty-seven plaintiffs from thirteen families lived near LaSalle, Ontario, Canada, across the Detroit River from several Michigan industrial plants.
- Plaintiffs alleged three corporate defendants operated plants that emitted noxious airborne pollutants in violation of state and municipal laws.
- Plaintiffs claimed pollutants traveled across the river and caused personal and property damage in Canada.
- Each plaintiff sought compensatory damages ranging from $11,000 to $35,000 against all defendants “jointly and severally,” without alleging conspiracy or concerted action.
- Plaintiffs also sought $1,000,000 in exemplary or punitive damages from each defendant, alleging willful and wanton nuisance.
- The parties agreed Michigan substantive tort law governed.

## Issues

1. Under Michigan law, can multiple defendants be held jointly and severally liable when their independent acts combine to cause an indivisible injury that cannot practicably be apportioned?
2. If so, does each plaintiff’s compensatory demand “jointly and severally” satisfy the federal diversity amount-in-controversy requirement as to each defendant?

## Decision

- The Sixth Circuit affirmed the district court’s denial of defendants’ motion to dismiss for lack of the jurisdictional amount.
- The court held Michigan law allows joint and several liability for indivisible harm caused by multiple independent tortfeasors, even absent concerted action.
- Because each plaintiff claimed at least $11,000 in compensatory damages jointly and severally against all defendants, each plaintiff satisfied the then-applicable $10,000 amount-in-controversy requirement as to each defendant.

## Legal Principles

- In diversity cases, state law governs the nature and scope of tort liability, including whether liability may be joint and several.
- Under Michigan law, when independent acts combine to produce an indivisible injury and apportionment is not reasonably practicable, a factfinder may impose joint and several liability on one or more tortfeasors.
- Michigan law does not require proof of conspiracy or concerted action to impose joint and several liability for indivisible harm.
- Where joint and several liability is available, a plaintiff’s damages demand against defendants “jointly and severally” is treated as placing the claimed amount in controversy as to each defendant for jurisdictional purposes; defendants retain contribution rights among themselves.

## Conclusion

The Sixth Circuit concluded that Michigan law permits joint and several liability for indivisible injuries from combined pollution emissions, so each plaintiff’s compensatory claim exceeding $10,000 against defendants jointly and severally satisfied diversity jurisdiction and the case could proceed in federal court.


Michie v. Great Lakes Steel Div., Nat’l Steel Corp., 495 F.2d 213 (6th Cir. 1974)