Memphis Police Car Crash: How Michigan Law Treats Crashes With Emergency Vehicles

By Koussan Law
Published October 11, 2026, 6:29 p.m. ET

Short answer: Five people in one car were killed and three people, including two Memphis police officers, were critically hurt when that car and a Memphis Police Department vehicle responding to a call collided in Memphis early on Sunday, Oct. 11, according to police and the Tennessee Highway Patrol as reported by local outlets. Any claims from this crash would be decided under Tennessee law, which this page does not analyze. If a similar crash happened in Michigan, a city or county could be liable for the negligent operation of its own police vehicle under the motor-vehicle exception to governmental immunity, emergency status does not erase the duty of care, and an individual officer could be sued only for gross negligence that was the most immediate cause of the injuries. The cause of this crash, including whether emergency lights and a siren were in use, has not been reported.

What happened

Memphis police said the crash happened at about 12:26 a.m. on Sunday at the intersection of Hickory Hill Road and Raines Road, according to WMC Action News 5. Officers were responding to a call near Flowering Peach Drive and Mendenhall Road when their vehicle and another vehicle collided, police said. The Tennessee Highway Patrol said the other car carried six people, according to WRCB (Local 3 News). Four of them were pronounced dead at the scene and a fifth died at the hospital, police told FOX13 Memphis. The sixth occupant and both officers were taken to the hospital in critical condition. Five people lost their lives, and three more remain in critical condition.

What we know so far

• The crash happened at about 12:26 a.m. on Sunday, Oct. 11, at Hickory Hill Road and Raines Road in Memphis (WMC Action News 5, citing Memphis police; FOX13 Memphis puts it at around 12:30 a.m.).
• Two vehicles were involved: a car carrying six people and a Memphis Police Department vehicle carrying two officers who were responding to a call for service (WRCB, citing the Tennessee Highway Patrol). WMC describes the call as a "man-down" call near Flowering Peach Drive and Mendenhall Road.
• Five people died, all occupants of the other car: four at the scene and one at the hospital (FOX13 Memphis, citing Memphis police; WMC Action News 5).
• The sixth occupant of that car and the two officers were hospitalized in critical condition (FOX13 Memphis; WMC Action News 5).
• The Tennessee Highway Patrol's Critical Incident Response Team is leading the investigation and reconstruction (WRCB, citing the Highway Patrol).

What has not been established

• What led to the collision. WRCB reported there was no word yet on the cause.
• Whether the police vehicle was using emergency lights and a siren, how fast either vehicle was moving, and which way each was traveling.
• Whether either vehicle had a red light or stop sign at the intersection.
• The names and ages of the people who died; police had not released them.
• Whether any citation, charge or civil claim will follow.

Can a city be sued when a police car crashes on the way to a call in Michigan?

The motor-vehicle exception to governmental immunity

Michigan public bodies are generally immune from tort claims while engaged in a governmental function (MCL 691.1407(1)). The Legislature carved out an exception for driving. Under MCL 691.1405, governmental agencies "shall be liable for bodily injury and property damage resulting from the negligent operation" of a motor vehicle they own by any officer, agent or employee. So the question in a Michigan case would be the same one any crash case asks: was the vehicle driven with reasonable care under the circumstances?

Why a direct collision differs from a police chase

Michigan's leading case on police pursuits, Robinson v. City of Detroit, 462 Mich 439 (2000), involved pursuits in which fleeing cars crashed into other people. The Michigan Supreme Court held that the exception does not reach those injuries where the police vehicle "did not hit the fleeing car or otherwise physically force it off the road or into another vehicle or object," and that the decision to pursue is not "operation" of the vehicle. A crash in which the police vehicle itself collides with another car is a different situation: the injuries come directly from the operation of the government's vehicle, which is what the exception covers. In an unpublished 2026 decision that is not binding precedent, Gamarra v. Oakland County, the Court of Appeals reversed a ruling for a county and sheriff's office under the motor-vehicle exception after a deputy drove the wrong way on an emergency escort, while holding the deputy personally immune. It illustrates how the agency claim and the officer claim can come out differently.

Does responding to an emergency change the rules of the road?

Michigan's emergency-vehicle privileges come with conditions

Michigan's Vehicle Code applies to government drivers (MCL 257.603(1)), and subsection (2) gives limited privileges to the driver of an authorized emergency vehicle "when responding to an emergency call." Under subsection (3), the driver may "Proceed past a red or stop signal or stop sign, but only after slowing down as may be necessary for safe operation," and may "Exceed the prima facie speed limits so long as he or she does not endanger life or property." Under subsection (4), those exemptions apply only when the driver sounds an audible signal "as may be reasonably necessary" and the vehicle displays a flashing, oscillating or rotating red or blue light visible from 500 feet. Subsection (5) lets a police vehicle keep the exemptions without a siren "if the police vehicle is engaged in an emergency run in which silence is required."

The duty of care does not disappear

The emergency-vehicle speed provision, MCL 257.632, adds that the exemption does not protect the driver "from the consequences of a reckless disregard of the safety of others." In a Michigan case, the facts that would matter most are the ones not yet reported here: whether lights and a siren were on, whether the officer slowed before entering the intersection, the speed of each vehicle, and what the other driver could see and hear.

Could an individual officer be personally liable in Michigan?

Suing the officer personally is much harder than suing the agency. Under MCL 691.1407(2), a public employee acting within the scope of authority is immune unless the conduct amounts to "gross negligence that is the proximate cause of the injury or damage." Gross negligence means "conduct so reckless as to demonstrate a substantial lack of concern for whether an injury results" (MCL 691.1407(8)(a)). In Robinson, the Supreme Court read "the proximate cause" to mean "the one most immediate, efficient, and direct cause preceding an injury," and Ray v. Swager, 501 Mich 52 (2017) explained how courts weigh the conduct of everyone involved to decide which cause that is. Ordinary negligence by an officer can support a claim against the employing agency under the motor-vehicle exception, but not a claim against the officer personally.

Who pays when people in the other car are killed or hurt?

No-fault benefits come from household policies first

In Michigan, the occupants of a car hurt in a crash generally claim personal protection insurance (PIP) benefits under a policy in their own household: one naming the person, a spouse, or a relative of either living in the same household (MCL 500.3114(1); section explorer). PIP covers medical care up to the limit the policyholder chose, wage loss, and, after a death, survivor's loss and funeral benefits.

Wrongful death claims and how fault is shared

A death meets Michigan's no-fault tort threshold (MCL 500.3135(1); section explorer), so the personal representative of each estate could bring a wrongful death claim under MCL 600.2922 against any party whose negligence contributed. Damages can include medical, funeral and burial expenses, conscious pain and suffering, and the family's loss of financial support and of society and companionship; the lifetime earnings of the person who died are not recoverable (Daher, Mich. July 30, 2024, Docket No. 165377). Fault is allocated among everyone involved, including the driver of the other car, and each defendant generally pays only its own share (MCL 600.2956; MCL 600.2957). Exactly which categories of damages can be recovered from a public body under the motor-vehicle exception has been litigated in Michigan courts, so that question would be reviewed early in any claim against an agency.

Evidence that matters and how fast it can disappear

• Police vehicle video and data: in-car and body-worn camera video, and any vehicle location or speed data the agency keeps. Retention is set by agency and records schedules rather than one statewide rule, so an early written preservation request matters.
• Dispatch records: the call log and radio audio show what the officers were sent to and how the call was classified, which bears on whether it was an emergency run.
• Event data recorders: many passenger vehicles record speed and braking in the seconds before a crash. That data may be overwritten or lost if a vehicle is repaired, salvaged or crushed.
• Signal and video evidence: traffic signal timing records and nearby business or traffic cameras, which may be overwritten in days or weeks.
• The reconstruction: the investigating agency's crash reconstruction is often the most detailed record of speed and position. In a Michigan civil case, evidence of a traffic conviction or civil infraction determination would not be admissible (MCL 257.731); the underlying evidence is what matters.

Who could be legally responsible

These are possibilities under Michigan law for a similar Michigan crash, not findings about this one:

• The public body that owns the police vehicle: under MCL 691.1405, if its officer operated the vehicle negligently and that operation led to the injuries.
• The officer individually: only if the officer's conduct was grossly negligent and was "the proximate cause" under MCL 691.1407(2).
• The driver of the other car, or that car's owner: if that driver's negligence contributed; an owner can be liable for a driver using the car with consent (MCL 257.401).
• No-fault insurers: for PIP benefits under each injured person's household policy, regardless of fault.

Michigan deadlines that apply

The firm's Michigan injury deadline calculator explains how these periods are counted.

Questions people are asking

Can you sue the police for a crash that happened on the way to an emergency in Michigan? You can bring a claim against the city, county or state agency that owns the vehicle if the officer drove it negligently and that operation led to the injuries, under the motor-vehicle exception in MCL 691.1405. Emergency status does not end the case; it changes what reasonable driving looked like in that moment.

Do lights and a siren protect an officer from liability? They are conditions for using the emergency privileges in MCL 257.603, such as going through a red light after slowing for safety. They do not excuse driving that endangers others, and MCL 257.632 keeps a driver responsible for reckless disregard of the safety of others.

Who pays medical bills for people in the other car? In Michigan, PIP benefits generally come from an auto policy in the injured person's own household, not from the government or the other driver's insurer. A negligence claim covers what PIP does not, such as pain and suffering.

Does a ticket or a police report decide fault? No. Michigan law keeps evidence of a traffic conviction or civil infraction determination out of civil trials, and a jury decides fault from the evidence itself, such as video, vehicle data and the reconstruction.

What if the other driver also made a mistake? Michigan uses comparative fault. Damages are reduced by each person's share, and in an auto case a person more than 50 percent at fault cannot recover noneconomic damages. The firm's guide to comparative fault explains the rule.

Who files a wrongful death claim in Michigan? The personal representative of the estate, under MCL 600.2922. The firm's guide to wrongful death claims in Detroit covers the process.

If you are dealing with a situation like this

Crashes involving government vehicles raise questions an ordinary crash does not: which public body owns the vehicle, whether a state notice deadline applies, what the emergency-driving rules required, and which records the agency holds. A free consultation can clarify those points and which deadlines are already running. Call (313) 800-0000 or request a free consultation. Koussan Law has offices in Detroit, Dearborn Heights and Marquette, and the team speaks English, Spanish and Arabic. See the firm's pages on government vehicle accidents and wrongful death claims.

Sources

1. WMC Action News 5, "5 dead, 3 seriously injured, including 2 MPD officers, after crash at Raines and Hickory Hill roads," October 11, 2026. Read the report
2. FOX13 Memphis, "5 killed, 3 injured, including 2 MPD officers after crash in Hickory Hill, MPD says," October 11, 2026. Read the report
3. WRCB (Local 3 News), "THP: 5 dead, 3 hurt after crash involving police car in Memphis," October 11, 2026. Read the report

Primary law cited:

• Governmental immunity: MCL 691.1405, MCL 691.1407, MCL 600.6431
• Vehicle Code: MCL 257.603, MCL 257.632, MCL 257.401, MCL 257.731
• No-fault: MCL 500.3114, MCL 500.3135, MCL 500.3145
• Wrongful death, fault and deadlines: MCL 600.2922, MCL 600.2956, MCL 600.2957, MCL 600.5805, MCL 600.5852
• Cases: Robinson v. City of Detroit, 462 Mich 439 (2000); Ray v. Swager, 501 Mich 52 (2017); Daher v. Prime Healthcare Servs.-Garden City, LLC (Mich. July 30, 2024; Docket No. 165377); Gamarra v. Oakland County (Mich. App. Mar. 6, 2026; Docket No. 370203; unpublished)