Opinion ID: 1347974
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: The Meaning of Incident To

Text: One of the remaining questions relating to the application of Code § 27-23.6 is whether the exemption from suit for damages done incident to fighting fires encompasses damages resulting from the operation of a fire truck en route to a fire. Amtrak argues that the statute only exempts a volunteer fire company from suit for property damages `done incident to' the actual act of fighting a fire. (Emphasis in original.) Amtrak draws this argument from a number of related statutes. Amtrak cites Code § 27-20, which authorizes a fire chief to destroy property in order to prevent the spread of fire, and Code §§ 27-21 and -22, which establish a procedure for recovery of such property damage from the city, town, or county involved. Then, Amtrak cites Code § 27-41, which provides financial relief to volunteer fire fighters killed or injured while fighting fire or while responding to an alarm or returning from the scene of a fire. This distinction, Amtrak states, demonstrates that the drafters of Section 27-23.6 intended for the limited language `incident to fighting fires' to literally mean fighting fires and to exclude a fire company member's operation of a fire truck to and from the scene of a fire. [1] We disagree with Amtrak's argument concerning the operation of a fire truck en route to the scene of a fire. The word incident is defined as [s]omething dependent upon, appertaining or subordinate to, or accompanying something else of greater or principal importance, something arising or resulting from something else of greater or principal importance. Used both substantively and adjectively of a thing which, either usually or naturally and inseparably, depends upon, appertains to, or follows another that is more worthy. Used as a noun, it denotes anything which inseparably belongs to, or is connected with, or inherent in, another thing, called the `principal.' Black's Law Dictionary 762 (6th ed. 1990) (citation omitted). We think that both definition and common sense compel the conclusion that the operation of a fire truck en route to the scene of a fire is incident to fighting the fire. Accordingly, we hold that Catlett is entitled to the exemption from suit for damages provided by Code § 27-23.6, and we answer the first certified question in the affirmative.