Court Opinion

ID: 9593387
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 00:22:02.168651+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:00:40.462759
License: Public Domain

Riley, J.
(dissenting). I write separately to indicate my agreement with Justice Coleman’s dissenting opinion in Funk v General Motors Corp, 392 Mich 91, 116; 220 NW2d 641 (1974), and Justice Ryan’s views in regard to Funk as expressed in Beals v Walker, 416 Mich 469; 331 NW2d 700 (1982).
I believe Justice Coleman was correct in rejecting the policy behind the Funk decision that was "used to advance theories of employment relationships which can render the property owner and the general contractor absolute insurers for any injury received by the employee of an independent contractor.” Id. at 116-117 (emphasis added). I believe that such a theory represented "a significant departure from time tested theories of tort liability.” Id. at 116.
*674Moreover, I am in accord with the conclusion reached by Justices Ryan, Coleman, and Fitzgerald in Beals, supra at 479, that Funk "has been overruled in light of the adoption of comparative negligence.”
In light of the above, and on the basis of the facts presented in the matter before the Court today, I would affirm the Court of Appeals finding that there was insufficient evidence to establish that either defendant owed a duty to plaintiff or that such alleged duty was breached.