Opinion ID: 1200929
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: limitation on liability

Text: Seattle Municipal Code 21.49.110(S) states that: The Department shall not be liable for any loss, injury, or damage resulting from the interruption, restoration, or reduction of electric service from any cause, including but not limited to failure of generation and distribution systems, inadequacy of energy supply, implementation of emergency plans, or temporary disconnections for repairs and maintenance or failure to pay for service rendered. During an emergency declared by appropriate civil authority, the Department may curtail electric service. (Italics ours.) [1] In determining whether the City can confer immunity upon itself in light of RCW 80.04.440 and RCW 80.28.010(7), we look to the rule that statutes must be read together to determine legislative purpose to achieve a harmonious total statutory scheme ... which maintains the integrity of the respective statutes. [5] RCW 80.04.440 holds utilities liable to the persons or corporations affected thereby for all loss, damage or injury caused by the failure to do an act required by state law or commission of an act prohibited by state law. RCW 80.28.010(7) provides that [a]n agreement between the customer and the utility, whether oral or written, shall not waive the protections afforded under this chapter. RCW 80.28 regulates gas, electrical and water companies. RCW 19.122 imposes upon the City the duty to mark its underground utilities and imposes liability for breach of that duty. The chapter explicitly includes a state, a city, a county, or any subdivision or instrumentality of a state as subject to its provision. [6] It renders them liable for any damages caused by their failure to locate and mark their underground facilities as required by the statute. [7] [2] The City of Seattle is not immune from liability. A municipality has only so much immunity as it derives from the sovereign. Sovereign immunity was abolished in this state in 1963 when the Legislature declared that `[t]he State of Washington, whether acting in its governmental or proprietary capacity, shall be liable for damages arising out of its tortious conduct to the same extent as if it were a private person or corporation'. [8] The Legislature adopted a policy favoring purchase of liability insurance and enacted statutes authorizing local governments to purchase it. The State may purchase, or contract for the purchase of, property and liability insurance for any municipality upon request of the municipality. [9] Additionally, local governments may self-insure. [10] This insurance shall include but not be limited to coverage for claims arising from the tortious or negligent conduct of the local government entity ... or agents.... The Legislature in RCW 35.21.415 declined to grant immunity to cities or towns. [11] In viewing the statutory scheme as a whole, the conclusion is reached that the Legislature clearly did not intend that the City of Seattle have immunity from any loss, injury, or damage resulting from the interruption... of electric service from any cause, [12] as stated in the Seattle ordinance. [3] A municipality may be held liable for injuries to property belonging to another. [13] It is firmly established that in a proper case a city may be held liable on the theory of negligence. [14] A city may be held liable for either a negligent act of commission or a negligent act of omission. [15] A city's negligence need not be the sole cause of an injury, but if its negligence concurs with that of another to produce a wrong, both of the tortfeasors may be held liable. [16]