
    WARDLOW v. CITY OF DETROIT.
    Municipal Corporations — Torts—Governmental Immunity.
    Order dismissing, as to defendant city, action against it and 18 of its police officers for wrongful death of plaintiff’s decedent because of alleged negligent and careless exertion of unnecessary force in effecting the arrest of deceased prior to decision of ease overturning doctrine of governmental immunity for ordinary torts as to municipal corporations, is affirmed by Talbot Smith, Black, Edwards, Kavanagh, and Souris, JJ., because cause of aetion arose prior to time governmental immunity doctrine was overturned, and by Dethmers, C. J., and Carr and Kelly, JJ., because the doetrine of governmental immunity has not been abrogated as to such tort by the legis: lature, it being agreed that the ease is variously controlled by the differing opinions in Williams v. City of Detroit, 364 Mich 231, 233, 250, 270.
    Appeal from Wayne; Culehan (Miles N.), J.
    Submitted June 7, 1961.
    (Docket No. 19, Calendar No. 48,955.)
    Decided September 22, 1961.
    Case by Bernice Wardlow, administratrix of the estate of Lark Jordan, deceased, under death act against the City of Detroit, a municipal corporation, and 18 of its police officers for wrongful death of plaintiff’s decedent. Dismissed as to defendant city. Plaintiff appeals.
    Affirmed.
    
      Ivan E. Barris, for plaintiff.
    
      Nathaniel H. Ooldstick, Corporation Counsel, and Robert D. McClear, Assistant Corporation Counsel, for defendant city.
   Black, J.

The plaintiff widow sues for wrongful death of her husband, alleging liability of the city and 18 Detroit police officers “upon the theory that they [the police officers] had negligently and carelessly exerted unnecessary force in effectuating the arrest of the deceased, as a result of which serious injury, ultimately causing his. death, were inflicted.”' Detroit moved to dismiss, alleging immunity from liability. Circuit Judge Culehan granted the motion. Plaintiff appeals.

The cause of action having arisen May 6, 1958, I would affirm, without costs. For reasons see my separate opinion of Williams v. City of Detroit, 364 Mich 231, 270.

Edwards, J.

(concurring). We concur in affirmance. See Williams v. City of Detroit, 364 Mich 231, 250.

Talbot Smith, Kavanagh, and Souris, JJ., concurred with Edwards, J.

Carr, J.

(concurring). The order of the trial court dismissing the city of Detroit as a party defendant in this cause should be affirmed for the reasons stated in my opinion in Williams v. City of Detroit, 364 Mich 231, 233.

Dethmers, C. J., and Kelly, J., concurred with Carr, J.  