Opinion ID: 2763303
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: “liable for”

Text: Our recent decision in Bradley Estate sheds light on the proper interpretation of the phrase “liable for,” though the motor vehicle exception was not at issue in that case. Instead, we interpreted the phrase “tort liability” found in the GTLA’s broad grant of immunity, MCL 691.1407(1),36 which grants immunity to governmental entities from “tort liability if the governmental agency is engaged in the exercise or discharge of a governmental function.” Specifically, we were called on to decide whether a particular cause of action sought to impose “tort liability” within the meaning of MCL 691.1407(1), thus, triggering governmental immunity pursuant to that provision.37 We concluded that “ ‘tort’ as used in MCL 691.1407(1) is a noncontractual civil wrong for which a remedy may be obtained in the form of compensatory damages.”38 Looking at the phrase as a whole, we explained: Our analysis, however, requires more. MCL 691.1407(1) refers not merely to a “tort,” nor to a “tort claim,” nor to a “tort action,” but to “tort liability.” The term “tort,” therefore, describes the type of liability from which a governmental agency is immune. As commonly understood, the word “liability,” refers to liableness, i.e., “the state or quality of being liable.” To be “liable” means to be “legally responsible[.]” Construing the term “liability” along with the term “tort,” it becomes apparent that the Legislature intended “tort liability” to encompass legal responsibility arising from a tort. We therefore hold that “tort liability” as used in MCL 691.1407(1) means all legal responsibility arising from a noncontractual civil wrong for which a remedy may be obtained in the form of compensatory damages.[39] 36 Bradley Estate, 494 Mich at 371. 37 Id. at 371, 380-385. 38 Id. at 385. 39 Id. (footnotes omitted; some emphasis added; alteration in original). 13 Because this Court concluded that “liable” means “legally responsible,” our interpretation of “tort liability” in MCL 691.1407(1) informs how to interpret the phrase “liable for” in the motor vehicle exception. We see no reason why this Court’s prior analysis of the word “liability,” which stems from the word “liable,” should not likewise apply in this case, particularly given that the phrases “tort liability” and “liable for” are contained within the same statute—the GTLA.40 Thus, the phrase “liable for bodily injury” means legally responsible for bodily injury.