STATE OF M-ICHIGAN

IN THE CIRCUIT CODRTFOR THBCOUNfY OF sAGINAw

GARY Mid KAtHY HENRY, et aI,

Plaintiffs,

v Case No.03-047115*NZ-5
HON. L~OPOLD P. BORR.I;:tLO
THE DOW CHEMICAL CaMP ANY,
a Delaware CorpofMion,

_Defendant.
I
--------~~---~

OPINION AND OMER .QRANfINO CLASS CERTIFICATION

At a sessioh of said Court held at the- COUI'thOU"$6 in the- City and COl.ility of
Saginaw and Stale of Michigan 011 this P./1P day ofCJ~+Rb:er _ ; 2005.
PRESENT: HONORABLE LEOPOLD P. BORRELLO, CIRCUIT JUDGE,

In this cause, oli Match 25, 2003; Plaintiffs filed a Motion for Certification as a
Class Action pursuant to MCR 3.501(8), befendantDowhas flied objections thereto. In
Plaintiffs' GomplaintandFirst, Seccmd, and Third Amended Complaints, Plaintiffs allege
six claims for relief: Count 1"'- Nllisance;Cout1.t II - Trespass; Conot III ~ Negligence;
Count IV - Ptihlic Nuisance; Count V- Strict Liability or A,bn6hnally Dangerous
Activity; and COMt VI - Medical Monitoting. -

011 August 18,2003, theCourtgtaiitedDef'eridarifs Mofiohfor Partial Summary

Oispositibnpursuaritto MCR2.116{G)(8) as to COUht II - TrespasS- and Count V ~Strict
Liability or Abnorrtnllly Dangerous Activity, but denied D¢fendant's Motioi1 as to Count
VI - Medical Monitoring. Subsequent!)', the Michigan Supreme Court, on July 13,2005,
issued its Opinion which reversed this Court's Order denyjng Defendant's Motion as it
related to Plaintiffs' medica.Irnonitor)ng c1aim ahd .remanded this matter for entry of an
order of sUlTImary disposition in Defendant's favor with regard to Plaintiffs' -medical
monitoring caUSe ofactiotl.

CUlTently before the Court is Plaintiffs' Motion for ClaSS Certification. Plaintiffs
allege that the Defendant, in operating its chernical plant, has OYer the yearS introduced
various chemical products into the Tittabawassee River, -including Dioxin, that Plaintiffs
claim is a hazardoifs chemical. Plaintiffs propose that the cla~s consists Qf aU persons
who owned real property within the one-hilridr¢d year Flood Plain ofthe Tittahawassee
River in Sagjnaw COttnty~ MlcbigaI1.., 011 F:ehl'uary: 1, 2002. Fotputp(jses of this class
defmitiort, the one"-hundredyear Flood Plain oftheTittabawas.see River is defined as the
geographic area set fbrth oli theluap herein attached ~s E;.4:rlbit. B. which ;s :g¢hetilly
b.Qt1l1ded on the We5tart4 SQUth by River Road and Stroebel.Road,including propertYCJl1
the we'sLandsQutlt s'ide of $u¢,h roads, and generally bounded on the east and north by
MidlIDld Road, St. Andr~wsRoad,an.d Mjehfgatl Aveiiue~iirctl1ding property on the east
and north sides of such roads and avenqe.,Pla:intiffs estimate that the proposed class
would consiSt ofapptbXirbately 2,000 persons.

Oue to the litnitedcMe 1[W in MIcIDga11addtesslng certifica.tion of class action

lawsuits, the Court can refer to federal case law thaUnterpre!s the federal rules 011 class
certification. Brenner v.MarathanOi! Co., 222 Mich. App. 128, 133 (1991). When
evaluating a motion faf dass cettification~ the court i~ to accept the allegations of the
plaihtiffin s4PPOl't bfthe mQtidhastriie. The merits ofthe case are not examined. Allen
V. ChicC/go, 8,28 Fed. Supp. 543,5$() (N.b~I1l. 1993). The plaintiff bears the burden of
proving that the class sho~ldbe)Celtified. ibid.

One 6rmdre menibefsbftheclass lnay sue or be sued as rep_re~sentative patties on

behalf of aU the members of thijj 'class action orrlyif:

a. Thedassisso numetOU$ thatjoinderofaiJ membefsis il::tiptactlcable;

b. n1efe areq uestions of law orfactcalTIl11on to the l1lembersof the class'
that pred,omii1ate over qUestions affecting only individual members;
~. TIre claims or defenses pfthe representative partres ate typical of the
claims or defenses oJ thecla-5s;
d. The representative parties will fair1yat:1d a.deqljately assertan4 protect
theintetest of the class; and . .
e. The mamtetiatlc.¢ 6f the action asa Class action will he $'ltperior to
othe1' a:va:ilablefi1¢thods of adjudic~:tion in promoting a convenient
administra.tionof justice~ [MeR 3.501(A)(1)]

a. The first requirement that the Plaintiffs must meet is that "the clas~s is so
hU111.etous that joh1det of all members is itnpracticable". MeR J.$()l (A)(l )(a), The
Plaintiffs define tbe pot~tltia1 ClaSs as: .

"Ail persons who owned real property within theone";htihclr:ed year Flood
Plain 01 the i:ittahawassee RiverihSagii1~~Cqunty} Mi~higan on
February 1, 1002. For p~rpOses of this class definitiol1~ the oue.;hundred
year FloDd Plain ofthet'ittabawassee: River is defmed as the geographfc
area set forth on the map~ttached as EXhibit A (EXhibit S attached to tills
order), which is generally bounded on the west m)'d south by RiVer Road
and Stroebel Road, inch.lcfil1g property on the we$t ap:d squth side of such
roads, and gertetallyboullded On the east and n6rthby Midland Road, St.
Andrews RO<:'td, and Michigan Avenue, incl\1ding property 011 the east and
tiOlth sides ofsuch roads and avenue."

2
 The Plaintiffs ~tls0
aTlege and t.heCourt fihds that iherewbuid be appfoxilnately
2,000 pei's6ns in the proposed class. 111e Court finds that the class is so numerous tl131
joinder of all meni.bers.is itnpracticahle.

b. There are questiolls of law or racf COtni:l)On t6 the members of the class that
predominate over questions affectingonly individual members;

All of the Plaintiffs'c,lainis ate based6n the aHegationthat tlIe Defendant

polluted the Tittabawasse.e River, Gausing datnag¢ to the: Plaintiffs in the form of re.duced
value of their hqijle lln9 propetty, Theref.ore, the alleged negligence of the Defendant, 1f
any, ·as to the caus~of the alleged pollution is cOIl1mqn to~Ilpotel)tial Plaintiffs..
Equal1y,any questions of "law would be 'common to lheentire crass. Although the
question of damages may be Imiividualized, the mere fact that damages may have to be
computed individuallY is
not enougb to defeat a class action. As the Court stated in
Sterlingv. Velsicol them, Corp,,8S5 F.2d 1188, 1197 (6t11 Cit. 1988):

"No matter how ihdividualized tile issues ofdamages may be; these issues
lil.ay be resetved for ilidividtfa1 treatment with the question of liability tried
as a class action. Consequently, the mete fatt thEi.t questio11s peculiar to
'each inclividuatl1).ember of the class remahiihg aftet the CbIili110n
questions of the defendaliPs liability have by-en res.oIved do~s hot dictate
theconc1usion that a class action is iri1pennissible;'" See also Dix v, Am.
}J4nkers Lf/e AssUrai1ce Co., 429 Mich. 410,417,418,419 (987), and the
more recent case of !VIejdti{ch, -et at v Met-CaUBy's. Corp., 319 F.3d 9J 0
(7th Cir. ~003).

This Court finds that therecareqilestionsoflawor fact common to the members of

the class that pl'edontinatebverqulestionsaffectingonJy individual members.

Co The claims. or .cJefens-es ofthe repteSe11tative.pattH~sare typi¢a16ftheclaiiris 6r

defenses of the class, .

1n this case, Plailitiffs contend tna:f lheirprbpert~y ,Claims arise from the same
course of conduct l:>Y Defendant Dow and .that they share ·C.OtnniOD legal and r.emedial
theories with the mell1Qer:s oftJ:te class. The COtlrthi CoOk v Rtxc!cwell bu'l Corp. ahd
The Dow Chell? Co., 151 FRO 378 (1993), stated:
"So long as thete isa. nexus betWeen the class representatives' claims are
·defenses and thecoITntfon questio11s of fact ot law which unite the class
the typicality requirement· is satisfied (9iiatiol'ls6ihitted).... The: PQ$iti6ns
of the mHued pla.intiffsand the potential Class mernber~ do not have to be
identical. 'thus, the .requirement nlay be satisfied even though varying
fact patterns suppqii the qlaimsot defeoses of indiVidual class members or
there is a disparity in -the d~mages c1a:inled py the representative pcuties
and the other members of the'class. The court finds that the representative
 parties; clairtisa.i'enbt actvetse or fultagoms!ic to Others i6, the class.
Therefore, the cotittfirids that the claims or tle:f'ens'e.s of all of the
representative parties at¢- typical of thec1airos or defepses 'of the class and
are not ,antagonistic to the class."

d. The representative parties will farrlyarid adequatelY asseliand protect the

ititerestorthe da$s.

There presently are apprmdnlately ~evenPlaintiffs who are the representatIve

parties. Further, no pro-of has beetl submitted to this Court that would indicate that the
Plaintiffs herein, the representative parties, woUld 110t fairly and adequately assert and
protect the ult¢rest of the class.

e. The maintenance of the 'flctionas a class actiqn will 'be$uperior to ether

available l11ethods of adjudication in proinoting the, convenient administration ofjustice.

To deny a class acticm. in this caseahd anow the Pla.intiffs to pursue individual
claims would r~sult in up to 2,000 individual c1ai.ms being filed in this Court. Stich a
result would impede the convellienf administraiion of justice. Furt1wr, such a procedure
wou] dol' CQuid result in ii.1consistenr or varying adjudications with respect to individual
il1empe-rsOf the clt{ss. A class actiol1 W6ulda:lso aSsure legal assistance to the, members
,of the class. Moreover, a class 'action would achieveeconorny of time, effort and
expense. The Court specifically finds that -the~rction would be In~ag.e.able as a class
action based on· tbe facts and the reasons set forth herein. Eachtl1ember of the cla$s lives
in the area alleged to have been damaged. Each member of the class allegedlysu{fered
damages as a resuLt of the l'eleaseofcontartiinate'.s in the Thtabawassee RiVer. Almost
identical evide11ce would bee required tb establish negligehce alld ceausal connection
between the alleged toxic -col1tarp.lnation and Plaintiffs' damages ,attd the type of dama.ges
allegedly suffered. The Court stated in Sierling v, flelsical Chern. Corp. (supra) at page
1197:

"In the iIistant case~ e,aeh cla$s member lived i11 the vicinity 6ftne landm!
and allegedly suffer~d damages as a result of the ing¢$tifig or otherwise
using the contaminated water. Almost identical evi<:lence would be
reqUired to 'establish the level and duration Of chemical contamination, the
caU$a:! ij;bhil'ectioh, if any, between the plaintiffs' cohsumptionof the
contaminated water and the type of rnj:tlries allegedly suffered and the
defendant's liahility. A single major issue distitigtli$iUTlg the class
members is the ,nature and amount of damages~ if any, tl1ateachsustained.
To this extent; ac1ass action in the ,Instant case avoided duplication of
judicial effort a11d pt~ventedsepatateactidns from reaching inconsistent
results with similar; if not identical, facts. The <;l.istrict court clearly did
not abuse its discretion in certifying this action a,s a tule of23{b)(3) class
;;{etian. However, ind~vidl.ial members ofthe class still would be required
to subm.it eVidence. bbncerhing theil' particularized dfuilages, damage
cla.ims and subsequent proceedings." .

4
 The Court finds that the irrailltcllanceoJ the actidhas atlass action will be
s:upedor to other available methods of adjudication inptorttbthlg the convenient
adtninisttation ofjustice,

I3aSed oii the:t1iidirtgs and rea,sonsset forth above, the Coiii! hereby oiders that
Plaintiffs' Morioi) for Certification as a Class Action be add tite same is hereby
GRANTED.

1'tj8 FuRTl-IE:RQRbERED that thec:lass shall consist of all persons wlro owned
tMI pt9perty within the Oi:ie-liundted year Flood Plain of the Timibawassee River in
Saginaw County, Michigall Ot1 February 1,,2002.. For plltp6Sesof thisdass definition,
l

the one-hundred year Flood Plain of the 'Tittabawassee River 'is defhled as the geographic
area set forth on the map herein attached as Exhibit B. which is generally·boUl~ded on the
west and south by Rivet Road and Stroebel Road, including property on the west apd
~outh side of such. toads, ahd generally bounded on the east and north by Midland Road,
St. Andrews Road, arid Michigan Avenue~ iI1cludhlg ptoperty 011 the east and Ilorth s·ides
OfSllCh roads and avenue. .

It IS FUR11fERORDEREb that tbel1otice.set-fOdh in pLihltiffs' Memorandum

OpiniQpand herein rtiarked as Exhibit A is hereby approved by the- Court as the notice to
be utilized in this classacti'Oil; subject to beingliibdifled in tblhpliance With this order.

~
....... . ~
. .

~-0r00~<
." <~_: ..".:" . . :.. ;:. .... -' .

CIRCUIT JUDGE

5
 EXHIBIT A

STATE OF MICHIGAN
'IN THE CIRCUIT cQtJ1fr FOlt THE COUNTY OF SAGXNA\V

IMPORTANT NOIICBOFcLAss ACTION

1" The Ctrcuit CQili't f6r OYe County of Saginaw. Michigan has certified the
following c1assof shnilarlysltUated persQ'flS:

Allpetsons who owned real ptbpettyWithin (he one~hundred year f100d

plaii16f the TiWi.bawassee River (the "Flood Plain'') in Saginaw County,
Mic11igap on FebnJaty 1,2002 (the "PropettY-Owm:f Class").

PLEASEREAbffIIs NOTICE CAREFULLY.

IT MAYAFFECr YOUR RIGHTS.

PURSQANT TO MICHIGAN COURT RULE 3.501, \VHICH'PERMITS

A CLASS ACTION TO BE FILED BY REPRESEN'TATI\(E PARTIES
ON BEHALF OF ALL OTHERS WHO HAVE BEENSIMtLARLY
DAMAGED BY A C01\1MONEVENT. AND WHICH REQUIRES
NOTICE OF THE CLASS ACTION TO BE: Gl\!EN TO ALLPERSONS
REASONABLY BELIEVED TO BE POTEN.TiAL MEMBERS OF THE
CLASS; YOU ARE'I-ffiI{EBY NOTIFIED AS FOLLOWS;

A. NATURE AND ALLEGATiONS OF THE C~ASS ACtION

011 'Marth 25, 2003,a lawsuit was fned in the Saginaw 'County CircUit On behalf of
certain plaintiffs WhQ lite current or former residents of the Tittahawassee River 100-year flood
plain. Generally, this area encompasses the prop'el'ty I1~~t the river that experience$ seasonal
flooding. The lawsqit, which is pending! generally 'daims that the de.fendartt has polluted or
6th~rwise c-<::mtaminated the TiW:ibawMsee-River and flood pla.in ~lh dangerous levels {)f dioxin,
a toxic Was-teL T'he'lega:l theol'i¢s Qfliability against the defendant are .negligence, public
nuisance and private nUisance~ On behalf of plaintiffs, the lawsUit seeks to:

1. Obtaih damages whiCh W:i!ladequatelYi1J1d TUJJy cbmpeiiSate rill of those who

owned real property withiil the TittabawasSee River flood plain on february 1,2002;

2. Obtainariy ofher or further relief ftOlll the COlirt {hal might beapproptiate uhder
the circumstailCes.

DMendant The DowCherr.iical CothpanY lias admitted thalit believes that the dioxin in
the Tittabawassee flood plain nlay have come ft6mits historical operations; but denies that the
presence of dioxin in the flood plain is any threat to human health or the environment, or tbat any
propel1y or other rlatbhg.e has ocdli'red. Defendarttbas denied tl:nn the relief t~qujred -should he
granted.

The names and addresses of the tepresentative parties bringing this Class Acti-dnare
iisted in Exhibit 1 attached hereto.

Qlj .. ,the Saginaw County Cil:cuJt Courtcettihe<1 this class Adion

and has ordered that notice of the Class Atti-oD he :COmmU11icated to ali Classme:mbers.
explaining the: naturebf the aClibi1-atld theit rightS with regard to it; alld directing them as to what
they must do with regard to protecting theitiriterests. That is the-pU!1'0Seof this Notice.

B. YOVRRIGHTSAND CHOICES

1. If yougiuilify for Class n:rembership -by being one of the persons describeditl
Paragraph 1 at the beginning Of the Notice, you will automaricl:\Uy heiocltlded in the Class. You
have a right to-be a pan of theCla,ss, and yOJJ also have a-right to be exc:luded from theClas$.

2. If you wish to be: a part of lheCla:ss, yourieecl do ii.cithirig.

3. If you donoI Wish to be induded in the Class ACti()fi,YOUITIUSl file Ii notice that
you eject to be excluded by 110 later t h a n . You may do this by mailing
to the address -shown below. by first-class mail, and postma.tked no later t h a n , a
Jetter or posltatd identifying yourself and stating: "I d~sire to .beexc!uded from the Dioxin Class
Action."
4. Notice of ExClUSIon froli1 the Class must be made by each individual desiring to
be excluded, and mustbe datedan~dsigned by each indiViduaL

MIN.ORS
5. IF' YOU ARE THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF A MiNOR (A PERSON
UNDER THE AGE OF 18 Y.EARS). YOU MAY SIGN THE EXCLUSION ON BpHALF of
THE MINOR, BUT YOU f'iifUSr- GIVE TI:lli MINOR'S FULL NAME; DATE Of BffiTlt
YOUR RELATIONSHIP TO THE MtNOR, AND :lNCLU,b'B A COpy OF YOUR LETTERS
OF AUTHORITY DES1GNA1"ING YOU AS THE CHILD'SLEOALREPltESENTATIVE.

6. If you l1ave n6t bee}) fonri:aUy clesignatedas a legal representative of your child
and desire that your child be excluded .from the Class, you may not do so by simply signing a
letter as a parent.

7. T() be ,Ii leg(il tepieseritativedf the minor-child, YdU r.nu~t rake steps to be
appointed as the legal repr~sentalive(jf your child by the Probate Court of the CdUDtS' ]11 which
the minor resides.

2
'\ ..

8.Le:tt~tsHicticafbigth:atyouwishto beexdi.idedJrbl'rt the Class shouldbes¢til t6:

TheHono:rahle~e()PQld 'E. Borrelia'

~:~i~~:~,'·~:~:i~g~;~~~~~~~I',.C~filer
1. f1Solith MiChigan Avenue
Sagil)aw. M:ithigaii 48602

C. YQlJRontIGAfrONS ASACLASS :MEMBER

, 1.. Tfyou remam amembeto[ the 'Class Actiol1 '(py 19k.,ltigti6 action to beexc1ud ed
ftbtn it), youtiights will bed~terrnim~djhthe peilding hiwsuitand yotJ mttYp¢ eiititled to share
il1at:iy(~t{)vefY made.. in the ClassA6tjort,whe,ther by settlement or Jl1dgiflefit,sl,l.bject to

~~~u;~~~~o:~ra~~S:~~;P::~git~n:b;a~:ie~yf~l~s~S-~~:~;r~~'. ~b:~~'e~~~lrt~;~erb~oP;~~a:~li'~ ~~

rec(;jvety, you will Jir~t tie t¢quired tbsupply suchproofo.f YQi1tda:magesas the Court may
4irect. ' , '

2. thetb,sots 'and. expeilsesof the Titigatip)j willljehbrnehy ·i:he Class a~ a'wlible.

tfleseCbslsandexp:enses wilt b'ead\i,anced by the at-ton;eys i'epreS'¢l'iting the Class who will be'
teimblii'sed for tbes'ecosts a:ndexp~IlsesJrofilany settlement~dtJpdgi;hentObtilh1ed. Thearnount
of CbSIS ,and expenses and anyatt0l"ney. (e¢$ p\iid to tht'f attorneys representing Ule Class Will he
determi l1 etl by the C(iuttat the cQncll1sionofth~,litigatidrt,;ai1d ,i,lm aJso be t1~t1ucted from Al'iji
seltlementor judgmei1t6bHd.ileiL Jritheeventthat uti fa. Yotab1e:SettJe:mentor judgment is
bhtaitted, Ihe-Glas'$ willmn beo!:?ligaterl to pay any attOrt1eyfee$~utl11:aytem,aiD responsible for
theGQstsand eXpensesufthe') it:igatioiL '

tttbUNTERCLAIJ\ilS
No :co\Ifitettlaliiis have been file~ and no 11oriteo(ititeottOassett a counterclaim aga1rlst
dle CI ass or aUYI11el11ber$bftheClasshas been filed,

i. If ;you remaip irrthe Cl{l:sS A.ction (bytakingllo ;rl~til)t1 t(j:he: ¢:x¢1ude,d from it),
you will he bbtitId by Myjudgmeutt.herein;, whether favorable or unf'aV'or~bl¢i

2; If YOu '~.l1:tiose Not to be ihC1udedin th¢ Clas'S Aqt16ti"yo\i will NOT b~ bg\1.nd by
an,ydeClsi6ns orjudgm~t:its therein. "loti \\411 NOT beelltHl~ 'to s1ia:re jnthe ptoceedsoroth~r
tellef ofatly' -seltlem-entorjudgmenr tll¢teinobtained. '

It", RIGHT TO INTEI{VENE

Any membet ofihe: Class who desires to lrltervefieifi the lawsuit asa named PCirty may
dose.
 'theliilli1es amjaddre~s:es Of'the jaw firms :and attorneys representing the Class are
indicated below:

Tere:sa A.Weody
STUEVE SIEGEL HANSON 'VOODY LLP
:.330
.... W . iii s"lreet,.
'.'47 ..... ·.ure
's' : "t" Z··S·
" '0".' .
Kansas City, Missouri 64112
Tel~phofr¢:: (816) 114-':7100
Facshniler t816)714~7J() 1
.'i,EisirF1d3it{~mstetter
Michael F. Saunders
SPENCER FANE BRITT
. . 8£ BROWNE ttl'
'"

1000 Wahmt, Suite 1400

Kansas City, M064106
Telephone: {RIB) 474~8100

Facsimile:- (816) 474.:32J 6

Brucef'. Trogag
TROGAN AND 'fROG-AN p.e.
7628 GraUotRoad
Saginaw, Mi¢higan
T'elephotl¢: (989) 781-2060
Facsirn'il~: (989) 781-2293

YOlirihferests wiii ·be prQt~cted by the attQmeysrepre~entil1g the Class; hut you may,if
you wish,select your6wfiattQtney to re,preseht you at yburown expense or to negotiate an
independentsett1ement subject to Court a:pptbval and payment of attorney fees and lltigation
costs as ordered by the Court. .

H. AVAILABILITY OF PLEADINGS AND PAPERS; Q'(JE$'tlONS

AND INQtJ1RtESCONCERNING CLASS ACTION
For 61.11 details cCJh'cetningthis Class Action il.l1d the claims and defenses which have
been asserted by the parties, you or your counsel may reVie;w the pleadings and other papers filed
al the office of the Saginaw County Clerk at rhe Saginaw County COUnh6U$e on any business
day from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.

If you have any qUestions concemirtg the :Class Atilanor this Notice, pleiase do not
contact the judge. Thaise of you who alreadyhav¢ cdDtisel inay c:~n your attOtneys. or you may
contact dass counsel oranyaltd1TI~Y of ytllrt chQice fOf ihfQfihati(jh or le.gal advi¢:e:.

4
~001583 (TAYLOR}
 ·_..,,;""'."" .......a .." ... ~'

... _.

,...:-

"(! '"8
S
S
:...
'0
;,
tiS

a-
~
~
([1

!
S
I'

'j .2
!
1 ~

..j
.
'

\(1) '~ ~,

I~
l
IJl
0' ~ ]
~ .! 1
.I/'J
:! ! i
'" til f
.JJ.. '5\"
0

rf,J
d iJ
tj~
J
.s "~,
.2

"", ... ~ '='

i I ." jl>

"i' -~

, ~~~~" I.
'j ~

~(ilf d

I
"

• J
0,

[,!~; ~1~" ..j

I ~;'

"

'001584 (TAYLOR)
 11)- -
.0

. . ~ "

. .1-

--,- .•
.~---=-- =~ . ...,..----

P001 S85(TAYLOR}
P001586 (TAYLOR)
P001587 (TAYLOR)